Euro 2012 Prediction Competition

[Zelandakh]

Someone could play as few as 6 matches if all 6 of the teams they played in RR1 also advanced to the second round.

They might also have to play 6 of the 9 second round matches if none of the teams they played against in round 1 advanced. Of course you could set the condition for round two to be the lower of 1/2 of the matches in R2 or 1/3 of the matches in R1 + R2. That would give between 0 and 5 as the minimum requirement for round 2. Or change the 1/2 to 1/3 - then the minimum is between 0 and 3. Such a mix would certainly be a compromise between opposing objectives.

 

Note that Butler ratings are often a poor guide to performance. For example, what were the quality of Zimmerman's opponents in comparison with Fantunes'?

[Avoidance]

According to the Butler scores, Fantoni-Nunes were the weak pair in the Monaco team, averaging about -0.5 a board. Zimmerman topped the Butler table.

 

Though the Butler scores are weird. England came 4th, but two pairs had negative Butler scores, and the other was only barely positive.

 

You are only looking at the last 9 rounds. The qualifier was cross-imped separately.

In total for all 26 rounds

 

Gold/Forrester +152 +35 = +187/380 boards = +.49 IMP per board

Bakhshi/Townsend +108 -12 = 96/340 boards = +.28 IMP per board

Crouch/Patterson = +21 -10 = 11/280 boards = +.04 IMP per board

 

Fantunes =+361 -73 = 288/420 = +.67 IMP per board

Hegelmo/Helness = 192 +122 = 314/400 = +.79 IMP per board.

Zimmerman/Multon = -17 +36 = 19/180 = +.11 IMP per board.

[mfa1010]

There were 8 matches that didn't count towards the final standings => those 8 shouldn't count for minimum playing requirements.

Doesn't seem sensible, because the teams only know which matches that count AFTER that stage is over. At that point they can't go back in time and change their line-ups.

It is not fair if a pair needs to do a big catch-up in the playing requirements during the second stage, because they happened to have played the wrong teams during the first stage (regardless if on purpose or not).

[TimG]

In all team sports that I can think of, there are players who get little or no playing time, but who still receive a gold medal or championship ring, etc. (I know: bridge is not a sport.) Does it really matter whether someone who hardly plays at all wins a championship?

[iviehoff]

In all team sports that I can think of, there are players who get little or no playing time, but who still receive a gold medal or championship ring, etc.

Depends what you mean by team, but I can think of plenty of exceptions: rowing, track relay events in athletics, various multi-rider events in track cycling, synchronised swimming/diving, etc.

[TimG]

Depends what you mean by team, but I can think of plenty of exceptions: rowing, track relay events in athletics, various multi-rider events in track cycling, synchronised swimming/diving, etc.

Good counter examples. Relay events in track may be a particularly good case.

[gnasher]

I'm surprised that anyone thinks it matters much. Regardless of how many boards Zimmerman played, nobody will think of him as a European Champion. When a sponsor wins something, the assumption is that the team won it despite the sponsor, not because of him. Even if the sponsor had played throughout, people would just think that the rest of the team deserved more credit for carrying him for longer.

 

This may be a bit unfair on someone who has spent a lot of money on putting together a good team, obtaining the right for them to compete, paying for them to compete together in other events, and so on, but it's the way things are.

Edited June 26, 2012 by gnasher

[jeffford76]

Good counter examples. Relay events in track may be a particularly good case.

 

Actually in these you aren't typically required to run the same team in every heat. So it's more like bridge.

[jallerton]

But in each case, the final 18 teams have played each other once each and their final score is determined by the total VPs won against the other 17 teams. It only seems random because you are taking into account the extraneous information about how well those teams did against teams who never made the final.

 

It seems random because it is random which particular information from the round robin stage happens to become extraneous. The teams play a lot of boards during the group round robin stage. During that time, every team will have matches where the team plays well and/or is lucky (resulting in high VP scores), and other matches where the team plays relatively badly and/or is unlucky (resulting in low VP scores). Will a team get to carry forward its high scores or its low scores?

 

In fact, later posts have revealed that some of the information from the group stage against non-qualifying teams was used in some sense.

 

If there had been some entirely separate tournaments which determined who the final 18 were, and then they did a round robin, you probably wouldn't be concerned with how those people did against teams which never made the final.

 

Maybe, but in these championships they did not play a complete round robin in the final stage of the tournament.

 

 

In the real world, with 18 teams in the second stage, the teams that have anamalous carry-forward scenarios - like Iceland who have qualified into the second stage despite being way behind Estonia and Wales in terms of their performance against the leaders - are likely to be so far behind the leading teams as to be irrelevant.

 

I agree that the teams finishing 8th and 9th in the group stage are likely to be too far behind the leading teams to catch up, but my point was about the scores carried forward by the leading teams from the matches against the teams finishing 8th and 9th in the group stage.

[jallerton]

In all team sports that I can think of, there are players who get little or no playing time, but who still receive a gold medal or championship ring, etc. (I know: bridge is not a sport.) Does it really matter whether someone who hardly plays at all wins a championship?

 

Depends what you mean by team, but I can think of plenty of exceptions: rowing, track relay events in athletics, various multi-rider events in track cycling, synchronised swimming/diving, etc.

 

Are you seriously suggesting that synchronised swimming is a sport?

[blackshoe]

This may be a bit unfair on someone who has spent a lot of money on putting together a good team, obtaining the right for them to compete, paying for them to compete together in other events, and so on, but it's the way things are.

It would also be more than a bit unfair on a sponsor who also happened to be a good player. If there are any such. B-)

[JLOGIC]

I'm surprised that anyone thinks it matters much. Regardless of how many boards Zimmerman played, nobody will think of him as a European Champion. When a sponsor wins something, the assumption is that the team won it despite the sponsor, not because of him. Even if the sponsor had played throughout, people would just think that the rest of the team deserved more credit for carrying him for longer.

 

This may be a bit unfair on someone who has spent a lot of money on putting together a good team, obtaining the right for them to compete, paying for them to compete together in other events, and so on, but it's the way things are.

 

It depends on who the sponsor is I think

[mrdct]

I think what Zimmerman has done for bridge in bringing these two top-class pairs together in the face of all of the problems they were having with their respective NBOs is to be applauded. Surely, it's in the best interests of bridge to have the best players in the world contesting the major championships. It's certainly in the best interests of humble spectators such as myself.

 

I would have no objections if other well-heeled sponsors undertook similar projects and I'm somewhat surprised that none of the top American sponsors have looked at taking over getting in bed with a Caribbean NBO, many of which routinely don't send national teams to zonal or world championships. I imagine it would be relatively easy for an American pro to split their living arrangements between Florida and <insert Carribbean country of choice> to meet WBF eligibility requirements and still be able to play all of the NABCs, etc. Also, in many Carribean countries if you pull-off a win in a major sporting event you get knighted!

 

Any takers for Sir Justin Lall?

[Mbodell]

Are you seriously suggesting that synchronised swimming is a sport?

 

Says the bridge players considering bridge a sport? I don't think we are in a position to cast stones.

[Mbodell]

I'm surprised that anyone thinks it matters much. Regardless of how many boards Zimmerman played, nobody will think of him as a European Champion. When a sponsor wins something, the assumption is that the team won it despite the sponsor, not because of him. Even if the sponsor had played throughout, people would just think that the rest of the team deserved more credit for carrying him for longer.

 

This may be a bit unfair on someone who has spent a lot of money on putting together a good team, obtaining the right for them to compete, paying for them to compete together in other events, and so on, but it's the way things are.

 

But if this is the case, why even require the 1/3 boards in the first place?

[gnasher]

But if this is the case, why even require the 1/3 boards in the first place?

I expect that the people who make the rules have a different perspective to mine.

[Finch]

We know from looking at the top players that, for whatever reason, being male is an advantage.

 

I'm sorry, was this meant as a joke?

 

We know from looking at the top players that the majority of them are men.

It's an enormous and unjustified leap to go from there to suggesting that simply being male is, in itself, an advantage i.e. to imply that being born female immediately puts you at a (bridge) disadvantage.

 

p.s. if you seriously think that being male is in itself an advantage at playing bridge, doesn't that mean that when women play in open events they should be given a head start (like playing from the ladies' tee at golf?). I suggest that next time I play against you, perhaps you think a 0.1 imp/board handicap would be fair?

[JLOGIC]

wow

[MickyB]

We know from looking at the top players that the majority of them are men.

It's an enormous and unjustified leap to go from there to suggesting that simply being male is, in itself, an advantage i.e. to imply that being born female immediately puts you at a (bridge) disadvantage.

 

"The majority" is understating it somewhat, I believe. How many of the world's top 50 players are female? Can this really be accounted for purely by the m:f ratio amongst those taking up the game before a certain age, say?

 

Men tend to be more competitive and more obsessive than women. These traits are advantages when trying to become a top player.

[Aberlour10]

Well planned rather than incredible. Perhaps the playing requirements (to achieve medal and points) should be changed to one third of the boards in each round-robin.

 

In events with a round-robin followed by KO stages, the WBF regulations require you to play one third of the boards in the round-robin and then one third of the boards in the KO stages: I expect the EBL is similar. The format of the Europeans, with its double round-robin, is unique so no-one really addresses it, but one third in both round-robins sounds both fair and reasonable.

 

If the ACBL or USBF were running the event, then each player would have to play half the boards in both round-robins.

 

It will be interesting to see which teams decide to play 4-handed now or in final rounds at the KO stage of current event. Poland will most probably do. Monaco too? From one side they would be unbeatable in this case (imo of course), from the other , is the boss willing to resign of the own chance for medal and title?

[paulg]

It will be interesting to see which teams decide to play 4-handed now or in final rounds at the KO stage of current event. Poland will most probably do. Monaco too? From one side they would be unbeatable in this case (imo of course), from the other , is the boss willing to resign of the own chance for medal and title?

I would expect that most sponsors will be hoping to play more than 1/3 in the round-of-16 to alleviate the issue, although the match situation may make this more difficult.

[MrAce]

I wonder how many times Turkey needs to win the EC in ladies to get in the first 6 of the list :) Not even mentioning how many times they ended up in top 4.

[phil_20686]

Probably Dorothy Hayden Truscott.

 

She said something along these lines. In the days when people learned and played bridge at the kitchen table, a woman would be thinking about the chicken in the oven, picking up their child from school and whether everyone's drinks were full. A man would let the dinner burn in the oven, let the child almost drown in the pouring rain and let his guests die of thirst while playing bridge.

 

Sabine Auken said it in her book.

[nathan2008]

i have a question, where is our italian master Lauria? I didn't see him in the world mind games this time :( ... if he has a health problem, hope he could recover soon.