|
Post by JB Southpaw on Jun 23, 2017 7:31:31 GMT -5
guest2 I've always felt the qualifiers should get in as the bracket plays out, not reseeded after you have the 4. In other words, say an 8 beats a 1, all other brackets play out according to seed. That team should get to play 4 in the MD, but they get reseeded last (2,3,4,8) and play the 1. Thats a fantastic idea, and much fairer. Disagree, if you are the second seed in the Q and you handle your business, but the 1st seed loses? No, some loyalty has to be to the players. In Ricardo and Chaim's 1st Q they move in front of a team that has been grinding in more tournaments??? NO THANK YOU.
|
|
|
Post by JB Southpaw on Jun 23, 2017 7:35:44 GMT -5
This is the best first round I can remember. Rematch of last week's semi with Ricardo versus Jake. BTW how is it that Ricardo/Chaim finish third, but still come out of the qualifier last. Clemens and Vaught have made one MD and gone uno/dos, but they were seeded higher. AVP needs an adjustment to entry points. I bet Jake Gibb makes that point to Donald when he sees him next. Ed/Eric should be a lot of fun. Also a great chance to gauge Reid's progress. I also think Phil v the Bomgrens is a fun match. Hopefully a great weekend of volleyball! What sucks is the loser of the Ed/Eric match gets the loser of the Rcardo/Chaim match.
|
|
|
Post by rainmaker on Jun 23, 2017 7:37:11 GMT -5
No one will sway another's opinion here on this board, both sides have merit..
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Jun 23, 2017 8:21:59 GMT -5
Thats a fantastic idea, and much fairer. Disagree, if you are the second seed in the Q and you handle your business, but the 1st seed loses? No, some loyalty has to be to the players. In Ricardo and Chaim's 1st Q they move in front of a team that has been grinding in more tournaments??? NO THANK YOU. Then why not do the same in the case of early round upsets in the actual event? I would prefer if the qualifer were basically a single elimination extension of the actual event bracket, although I see why you would want to reward guys who have been grinding for a long time The problem with the qualifier system now, and some may not see this as a problem, is it rewards showing up more than winning. A team like Drake/Luers that plays most events and never qualifies, is seeded higher than Parra, who qualified 4 times last year, got a 7th and was playing with an Olympian. I'm not sure there is a better way to do it, other than maybe reweighting points, or automatically seeding anyone who played a main draw in the last year over anyone who didn't, but on one of the old East Coast tours, I think Toyota, they mostly went by points, but also injected some common sense into it.
|
|
|
Post by JB Southpaw on Jun 23, 2017 10:04:43 GMT -5
Disagree, if you are the second seed in the Q and you handle your business, but the 1st seed loses? No, some loyalty has to be to the players. In Ricardo and Chaim's 1st Q they move in front of a team that has been grinding in more tournaments??? NO THANK YOU. Then why not do the same in the case of early round upsets in the actual event? I would prefer if the qualifer were basically a single elimination extension of the actual event bracket, although I see why you would want to reward guys who have been grinding for a long time The problem with the qualifier system now, and some may not see this as a problem, is it rewards showing up more than winning. A team like Drake/Luers that plays most events and never qualifies, is seeded higher than Parra, who qualified 4 times last year, got a 7th and was playing with an Olympian. I'm not sure there is a better way to do it, other than maybe reweighting points, or automatically seeding anyone who played a main draw in the last year over anyone who didn't, but on one of the old East Coast tours, I think Toyota, they mostly went by points, but also injected some common sense into it. In all reality, we are talking the extreme case here and I think we know Ricardo and Chiam should be getting a WC. I've always thought if you upset a team, you should get extra points. Like a 10x multiplier in the 1st round, if the 16 beats a 1, the 16 gets an extra 160 pts. and 5x in the 2nd round 5 beats a 4, extra 20 points. That would catch up teams quickly.
|
|
|
Post by crawdaddy on Jun 23, 2017 12:53:05 GMT -5
Not sure who is doing the commentary on the AVP streams, but he's excellent - both professional & knowledgeable. Makes watching much more enjoyable.
|
|
|
Post by ajm on Jun 23, 2017 14:06:14 GMT -5
Not sure who is doing the commentary on the AVP streams, but he's excellent - both professional & knowledgeable. Makes watching much more enjoyable. Ryan Doherty did the Claes/Hughes vs Shaw/Tiegs match and was pretty good. Love the fact that they have players doing commentary between their matches. Now they have Jeff Alzina and Rich Lambourne on.
|
|
|
Post by crawdaddy on Jun 23, 2017 14:54:40 GMT -5
Not sure who is doing the commentary on the AVP streams, but he's excellent - both professional & knowledgeable. Makes watching much more enjoyable. Ryan Doherty did the Claes/Hughes vs Shaw/Tiegs match and was pretty good. Love the fact that they have players doing commentary between their matches. Now they have Jeff Alzina and Rich Lambourne on. Someone else was doing the early match. He was quite good. Doherty was fine and Alzina/Lambourne are excellent. Good job by AVP.
|
|
|
Post by bvbfan on Jun 23, 2017 16:12:42 GMT -5
Love the announcers and you can find some of the side courts on fb live if you search for them
|
|
|
Post by donnyb on Jun 23, 2017 18:02:15 GMT -5
Wow Phil wins game one. He must me playing hard. Lol
|
|
|
Post by haze on Jun 23, 2017 18:43:39 GMT -5
Claes really struggling and they are getting worked. Hughes may want to rethink that partnership for the time being.
|
|
|
Post by rainmaker on Jun 23, 2017 21:50:37 GMT -5
My 4.5 Q wins looking low, 4 by the men today.
|
|
|
Post by socalplayer on Jun 23, 2017 22:32:09 GMT -5
Claes really struggling and they are getting worked. Hughes may want to rethink that partnership for the time being. I know right. Saw it live and it wasn't pretty. Claes' sets are all over the place. They served Hughes just to have Claes set. Her serve was non existent. Got 2 aces but the rest was average. 1 block, maybe 2. Hughes is amazing. Kerri needs a partner....just sayin'
|
|
|
Post by JB Southpaw on Jun 24, 2017 7:24:52 GMT -5
3 wins on the men's side from Q teams not ricardo/chaim. I should have said, I'm really happy that Pavan is playing with Caputo. Too bad the AVP couldn't tell Ricardo and Chaim, that if they want to play, they'd have to pick up someone in the USA pipeline.
|
|
|
Post by beej05 on Jun 24, 2017 9:49:48 GMT -5
Claes really struggling and they are getting worked. Hughes may want to rethink that partnership for the time being. I know right. Saw it live and it wasn't pretty. Claes' sets are all over the place. They served Hughes just to have Claes set. Her serve was non existent. Got 2 aces but the rest was average. 1 block, maybe 2. Hughes is amazing. Kerri needs a partner....just sayin' I haven't seen Claes enough. Is that typically how she sets. Cause some of the sets that were off looked in rhythm with Hughes?! But I dis think that Claes had a hard time setting. That would have made all the difference in the world. I do like that Summer and Brooke use the option offense a lot. Super frustrating as a defense. They did get pretty lucky on a couple of shots in the Claes/Hughes match with summers jumbo-pokey-hook shot to the corner. But Brooke and Summer are balling!
|
|