|
|
Post by volleyballjim on Aug 11, 2016 13:25:48 GMT -5
Heard it before and assume losers get pulled from the highest points, is that true, how many, how is it handled? Klazk, Beuller...? Tx!
|
|
|
|
Post by bvbllr on Aug 11, 2016 13:32:04 GMT -5
"The best two teams that rank third in their respective pools (first by match points, then by set ratio followed by rally point ratio and lastly by tournament seeding established at the general technical meeting), will advance automatically to the final phase. The four remaining third-ranked teams in each pool will play a two-match lucky loser round (3rd v 6th and 4th v 5th); the two winning teams in the lucky loser round will also qualify for the final phase." rio2016.fivb.com/en/beachvolleyball/competition/pools%20ranking%20criteria |
|
|
|
Post by bvbllr on Aug 11, 2016 13:34:28 GMT -5
so round of 16 will be:
6x first placed teams
6x second placed teams
2x best third placed teams
2x winner of other 4 third placed teams who need to play an extra game
|
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Aug 11, 2016 13:48:34 GMT -5
More international sporting bs that actively resists the idea that you must win to advance
|
|
|
|
Post by Gilmoy on Aug 11, 2016 14:02:41 GMT -5
We loves repechages! Especially when we use them!
For brutal, look at the single-elim and heat-based events: archery, boxing, fencing, tennis, table tennis, swimming, track, etc. Work a full cycle to qualify, travel all the way here, one poor bout/race and you're done, a spectator, you can tag along with Djokovic and collect selfies with medalists. That must be a couple thousand athletes. But it's the same format that those sports use in all of their other meets, so it's what they expect.
More likely is that 6 pools is just a bad tweener number between 4 (too few) and 8 (too many), and you must pick 4 more octofinalists somehow.
|
|
|
|
Post by trollhunter on Aug 11, 2016 15:02:55 GMT -5
We loves repechages! Especially when we use them! For brutal, look at the single-elim and heat-based events: archery, boxing, fencing, tennis, table tennis, swimming, track, etc. Work a full cycle to qualify, travel all the way here, one poor bout/race and you're done, a spectator, you can tag along with Djokovic and collect selfies with medalists. That must be a couple thousand athletes. But it's the same format that those sports use in all of their other meets, so it's what they expect. More likely is that 6 pools is just a bad tweener number between 4 (too few) and 8 (too many), and you must pick 4 more octofinalists somehow. You are right about the "brutality" of single-elim for a 4 year cycle. However, there are many better ways to do the format than this particular pool configuration. And it is not like the Olympic Committee must invent something new. Just off the top of my head: 1. Double-elimination tournament. Traditional beach format that actually takes less matches than this debacle. 2. Eight pools of three teams. Again less total matches, even if you have a playoff to advance. Everyone gets 2+ matches and are not eliminated by a single loss. It is amazing to me that Olympics, FIVB, and many other governing bodies can't choose equitable tournament formats. |
|
|
|
Post by bvbllr on Aug 11, 2016 15:56:42 GMT -5
looks like both 3rd ranked austrian teams will move directly to the next round - especially for huber/seidl a great success
|
|
|
|
Post by BuckysHeat on Aug 11, 2016 16:08:11 GMT -5
More international sporting bs that actively resists the idea that you must win to advance How do you figure? This is probably the ultimate win to advance as you have your shot to move on or to go home. I am loving the change, did not like the old format where the top 6 #3's advanced based typically on points. In theory most of the teams are competitive and the pools are equal in the Olympics. But that is not the reality and a #3 that gets a complete mismatch would get to move on based on points. Bottom 4 teams get to slug it out this way to earn their spot |
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Aug 11, 2016 17:17:08 GMT -5
We loves repechages! Especially when we use them! For brutal, look at the single-elim and heat-based events: archery, boxing, fencing, tennis, table tennis, swimming, track, etc. Work a full cycle to qualify, travel all the way here, one poor bout/race and you're done, a spectator, you can tag along with Djokovic and collect selfies with medalists. That must be a couple thousand athletes. But it's the same format that those sports use in all of their other meets, so it's what they expect. More likely is that 6 pools is just a bad tweener number between 4 (too few) and 8 (too many), and you must pick 4 more octofinalists somehow. You are right about the "brutality" of single-elim for a 4 year cycle. However, there are many better ways to do the format than this particular pool configuration. And it is not like the Olympic Committee must invent something new. Just off the top of my head: 1. Double-elimination tournament. Traditional beach format that actually takes less matches than this debacle. 2. Eight pools of three teams. Again less total matches, even if you have a playoff to advance. Everyone gets 2+ matches and are not eliminated by a single loss. It is amazing to me that Olympics, FIVB, and many other governing bodies can't choose equitable tournament formats. It's not that they can't, it's that they don't want to. The formats are not set up to reward the best teams. The formats are set up to spread the love around to all the FIVB members. Make sure everybody's cash cow gives off plenty of milk. |
|
