Aberlour10 Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 also in the NABC events they officially were teammembers - so team 10 will be as strong as always So far as I can remember team Gromov played exclusively 4-handed in all NABC main team events of last two years. ( =since B-Z have left team Welland). And it would be not possible/allowed if they were official registered as a "6er-team". Robert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 A guess here based on what I saw in earlier Spingold. Top 43 teams get a bye. The other 28 teams are divided into 7 groups of 4, and play 4-ways with 3 survivors?Correct. And some of us agree that using an entire day to eliminate 7 teams is silly, but it appears that the majority like it.Giving 43 teams a bye really seems absurd. Without getting into how, I would like to see it such that if you have to eliminate fewer than 20% of the field to get to the next power of 2, then instead you go halfway to the following power of 2. In other words, if you start with between 65 and 79 teams then you get down to 48 teams (halfway between 32 and 64) after the first day (because the 15 teams you would need to eliminate to get to 64 is less than 20% of 79), then 32 teams the following day. But if you start with between 80 and 128 teams then you get down to 64 after the first day. I know, people will object to any plan including that one (probably on the basis of having three-ways on the second day, something that doesn't bother me at all). But seriously, 43 byes and an entire day to eliminate 7 teams? Of course the majority like what was done. Tons of byes for the better teams and tons of making the second day for the worse teams. I don't find any of those situations particularly desirable, but there is no doubt they would be popular among the players. I mean, if 65 teams enter are we going to give 61 byes and eliminate 1 team? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Tu Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 I think it's perfectly fine like this. Just think of the first day as the qualifying tournament for the real event main draw like they do in tennis grand slams. Just like tennis you have "lucky losers" also, people who lose a match but get in later. If there are 65 teams maybe you have a single play-in match like they do for NCAA March Madness, the time is right for that anyway :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 Another option is to return to the days of Swiss and/or round robin qualifying for the first X days before the KO stage. (I am aware that there is strong sentiment in favor of keeping the Vanderbilt and Spingold as straight KOs, but I thought I'd mention it.) As someone who would get one of the very last seeds if I entered the Vanderbilt, I would not be upset to miss the opportunity of a full day match against one of the top seeds in favor of a full day (or two) of play against a variety of good teams. It seems very strange to me to enter an even that starts on Sunday only to find that I won't be playing until Monday (as happened to over half the field in this year's Vanderbilt). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterGill Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 1 Nickell2 Cayne3. Strul 52. Zhuang12. Diamond36. l'Ecuyer7. Meltzer8. O'Rourke Best early matches: R32: 52 Zhuang (despite Fu-Jack being taken by another team) versus anyoneR16: O'Rourke - RosenthalMatches involving 12 Diamond, 28 Ivatury or Seed 5 John Diamond also came 2nd in the LM Pairs in Boston 3 months ago. My best friend asked me a few months ago what happened to Diamond - Platinick, the "gun pair" of the USA team which won the 1991 World Junior Championship. Gromova and Ponomareva of Team Gromov anchored Russia to win the World Women's Chmpionship a few years ago, but the Vanderbilt is much tougher. Peter GillAustralia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bid_em_up Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 Does anyone have the bracket layout handy? (ie team #1 vs #?, team 2 vs. ?, etc) With the seeds alerady filled in, where possible? thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kfay Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 World Junior Championships in 1991 ANN ARBOR!!! W00T! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerben42 Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 Does anyone have the bracket layout handy? (ie team #1 vs #?, team 2 vs. ?, etc) It's very simple. For the round-of-N, two teams meet whose sum is N+1. For example for the round of 32, if two team numbers add up to 33, they meet, the horror example being of course 5 vs 28 (my pick for the Round-of-32). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keylime Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 I'll just predict the final three matches. Gromov's team has three pairings that I think can go the distance. No weak links in that lineup. Nickell: What else needs to be said. I am pulling for Rubin and Sabine of course (it's a canape thing). Mahaffey, the Chinese women's team, Uday's squad: dark horses Fred's team: I know of John's bridge skill; that pair is going to show up some folks. I think at least a quarterfinal appearance. I'd in for Gromov vs. Nickell. Semis of Nickell vs. Uday , and Gromov vs. Rubin. Winner: Nickell, in a very closely played affair. 104-90. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kfay Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 I'm going with: 1) Nickell2) Cayne3) Strul4) (13) Mahaffey (Shoot... didn't see they were going up against the Blanchards in Rd 1)5) (12) Diamond6) (11) Schwartz7) (10) Gromov8) (25) Rosenthal Final Four: 1) Nickell (finally back in form... if you can call it 'finally' or 'back in form')2) Gromov3) Schwartz4) Diamond Finals: Nickell over Schwartz, and it's not close... 190 to 105 All this tournament talk has me geared up for March Madness!! Where the Maize and Blue will be making a comeback after giving the country a decade off. GO BLUE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 Anyone have an idea why there are so few entrants? Last summer's Spingold had over 100 entrants, despite the fact that there are two concurrent Mini-Spingolds that draw away most of the teams with no chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted March 16, 2009 Report Share Posted March 16, 2009 Anyone have an idea why there are so few entrants? Last summer's Spingold had over 100 entrants, despite the fact that there are two concurrent Mini-Spingolds that draw away most of the teams with no chance. It's the summer..... By comparison, the last few Vanderbilts had 75, 82, and 72 teams, and the economy is likely making things a little worse, at least perhaps as far as some of the non-expert teams for whom entering is a luxury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keylime Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 In DC for the Spingold, I am practically certain there will be a larger pool - there's going to be some local teams that do well in that. Hopefully a team with a certain fruit is amongst them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 I like the top 3. 4-11 have a lot of good players but untested partnerships. 12 through about 20 (with a few exceptions) are scary good. My dark horses are: #31 - Kodayam who has gone deep recently. #34 - Hollman who deserves a higher seed IMO. My final is Strul beating Nickell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 ok pls stop...just post who has top 8. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomi2 Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 so Schwartz, Mahaffey and Rosenberg have been eliminated, tmie for new bets for most of us :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ulven Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 My dark horses are: #31 - Kodayam who has gone deep recently. #34 - Hollman who deserves a higher seed IMO. Those teams met in R64. Kodayam withdrew after 3Q (55-171). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_KARLUK Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 Diamond (2nd best)RobinsonNickellWelland(52) China Longzhu Open (My favorite)IvaturyKatzLynch Semi Finals : Diamond-Nickell;Katz/Cayne-China 60 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kleenpage Posted March 18, 2009 Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 1.CAYNE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted March 18, 2009 Report Share Posted March 18, 2009 So close to Fred vs. Uday... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edmunte1 Posted March 19, 2009 Report Share Posted March 19, 2009 Ok, we know the final 8: 1. Nickell vs.8. O Rourke 5. Diamond vs.4. China Open 2. Cayne vs.7. SUtherlin 6. Katz3. Pszczola What about the final 2? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted March 19, 2009 Report Share Posted March 19, 2009 It looks like I got 3 out of 8. edit :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twcho Posted March 19, 2009 Report Share Posted March 19, 2009 Peter Gill got it right. He knows better about the strength of China Open Team. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogerclee Posted March 19, 2009 Report Share Posted March 19, 2009 Peter Gill got it right. He knows better about the strength of China Open Team. :) One of the pairs is a pair of Chinese women, and I think there is a third, though I am not sure. Also Fu-Zhong is the top Chinese open pair, and they were playing on Mahaffey's team (as they have been). And yes, it is no surprise to me at least. I looked over a lot of hands they played, they are very strong players and would surely have won the Women's title if one of their pairs had not played quite poorly (no offense to the English team). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twcho Posted March 19, 2009 Report Share Posted March 19, 2009 There are two Chinese national teams playing in this event:Seed no. 52 is the open team, only 4 players playing because Fu-Zhao has been playing for Mahaffey.Seed no. 53 is the women team, full team that just captured NEC Cup. but they were eliminated by Diamond team in the round of 64. And now the open team face Diamond team again in the quarterfinal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.