Here are your IPT top 3 winners from each group

R

recoveryjones

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Here are your unofficial 3 winners and 2 losers from groups 21 to 40 after the first day of the IPT Las Vegas tourney.These are posted results from the IPT website and there is a slight chance there maybe some errors.
http://www.internationalpooltour.com/ipt_content/events/06_na_8ball_open/staticgroups.asp

In group 25 it is my assumption that Keith McCready will advance over Warren Kiamco even though they both had identical 2 match wins and lossses and identical 50% record in games won and lost. Keith beat Kiamco head to head so I'm assuming he advances,however, I'm not 100% sure.

The three names that advance are on the top of each list per group, with the losing two on the bottom.

All sorted out courtesy of Recoveryjones.

GROUP 21
Dennis HATCH
Ronnie O’SULLIVAN
Sandor TOT

Mike LEBRON
Vincent FACQUET

Group 22
Tom STORM
Daryl PEACH
John SCHMIDT

Konihiko TAKAHASHI
Leonardo GUNNAR

Group 23

George BREEDLOVE
Ralf SOUQUET
Mark TADEMY

Colin COLENSO
Jimmy FUSCO

GROUP 24
Jianbo FU
Jerry CALDERON
Sal BUTERAOUP

Paul BRIENZA
Laurant TRAVERS

GROUP 25

Michael ZIMMERMAN
Cliff JOYNER
Keith MCCREADY


Warren KIAMCO
Brian SALEH

GROUP 26
Sammy JONES
Evgeny STALEV
Antonio LINING

Aaron FRANKEN
Tony ROBLES

GROUP 27

Vilmos FOLDES
Rodolfo LUAT
Jimmy WETCH

Mori MANABU
Stephan SANTL

GROUP 28
Imran MAJID
Ralph ECKERT
Howard VICKERY

Thomas KENNEDY
Aaron CZETLI

GROUP 29
Gerry WATSON
Shawn PUTNAM
Marco MARQUEZ

Lee CHENMAN
Adam WHEELER

GROUP 30
Johl YOUNGER
Brian GROCE
Rafael MARTINEZ

Michael CERNERO
Jose PARICA



GROUP 31
Neil RAYBONE
Rodney MORRIS
Tomoki MEKARI

David RELJIC
Rafael GONZALEZ

GROUP 32
Paul POTIER
Kim DAVENPORT
Steve MOORE

Tyler EDEY
Jason MILLER

GROUP 33
Yannick BEAUFILS
Fabio PETRONI
Larry NEVEL

Wade CRANE
Max EBERLE

GROUP 34
Darren APPLETON
Allen HOPKINS
Takeshi OKUMURA

Patrick HOLTZ
Mike DAVIS

GROUP 35
Edwin MONTAL
Markus JUVA
Markus CHAMAT

Arturo RIVERA
Ryan KELLER

GROUP 36

Carl MORRIS
Bernd JAHNKE
Jeremy JONES

Robb SAEZ
John DITORO

GROUP 37
Bobby HUNTER
Tony CHOHAN
Troy FRANK

Lance SALAZAR
Danny DILIBERTO

GROUP 38

Mick HILL
Charlie WILLIAMS
Santos SAMBAJON

Ouahbi AMINE
Alejandro CARVAJAL

GROUP 39
Chris BARTRAM
Luc SALVAS
Michael SCHMIDT

Roland ACOSTA
Frank ALVAREZ

GROUP 40
Leil GAY
Scotty TOWNSEND
Nick VAN DEN BERG


Tony CROSBY
Stan TOURANGEAU

I'm pretty sure I've sorted this correct,however,if I've made some clerical errors here, please let me know.
Thanks
RJ
 
recoveryjones said:
In group 25 it is my assumption that Keith McCready will advance over Warren Kiamco even though they both had identical 2 match wins and lossses and identical 50% record in games won and lost. Keith beat Kiamco head to head so I'm assuming he advances,however, I'm not 100% sure.
Click to expand...

I believe McCready beats out Kiamco on Break-n-Runs, with three to Kiamco's one.

I read on InsidePool that the order of determining advancers is:

Match Wins
Game Winning Pct.
Break-n-Runs
8's-on-the-Break
Head-to-Head Match
 
Thanks for clarifying the tie breaking process, much appreciated.

Having said that I like the head to head matchup more than fluking an eight off the break. I think it's more fair. Break and runs is a decent way to decide a tie breaker,however, because that takes some skill.
RJ
 
Last edited:
Just to make sure I understand. The winning percentage is a tie breaker, and it means "wins per total games played." Right?

Fred
 
recoveryjones said:
Here are your unofficial 3 winners and 2 losers from groups 21 to 40 after the first day of the IPT Las Vegas tourney.These are posted results from the IPT website and there is a slight chance there maybe some errors.
http://www.internationalpooltour.com/ipt_content/events/06_na_8ball_open/staticgroups.asp

In group 25 it is my assumption that Keith McCready will advance over Warren Kiamco even though they both had identical 2 match wins and lossses and identical 50% record in games won and lost. Keith beat Kiamco head to head so I'm assuming he advances,however, I'm not 100% sure.

The three names that advance are on the top of each list per group, with the losing two on the bottom.

All sorted out courtesy of Recoveryjones.

GROUP 21
Dennis HATCH
Ronnie O’SULLIVAN
Sandor TOT

Mike LEBRON
Vincent FACQUET

Group 22
Tom STORM
Daryl PEACH
John SCHMIDT

Konihiko TAKAHASHI
Leonardo GUNNAR

Group 23

George BREEDLOVE
Ralf SOUQUET
Mark TADEMY

Colin COLENSO
Jimmy FUSCO

GROUP 24
Jianbo FU
Jerry CALDERON
Sal BUTERAOUP

Paul BRIENZA
Laurant TRAVERS

GROUP 25

Michael ZIMMERMAN
Cliff JOYNER
Keith MCCREADY


Warren KIAMCO
Brian SALEH

GROUP 26
Sammy JONES
Evgeny STALEV
Antonio LINING

Aaron FRANKEN
Tony ROBLES

GROUP 27

Vilmos FOLDES
Rodolfo LUAT
Jimmy WETCH

Mori MANABU
Stephan SANTL

GROUP 28
Imran MAJID
Ralph ECKERT
Howard VICKERY

Thomas KENNEDY
Aaron CZETLI

GROUP 29
Gerry WATSON
Shawn PUTNAM
Marco MARQUEZ

Lee CHENMAN
Adam WHEELER

GROUP 30
Johl YOUNGER
Brian GROCE
Rafael MARTINEZ

Michael CERNERO
Jose PARICA



GROUP 31
Neil RAYBONE
Rodney MORRIS
Tomoki MEKARI

David RELJIC
Rafael GONZALEZ

GROUP 32
Paul POTIER
Kim DAVENPORT
Steve MOORE

Tyler EDEY
Jason MILLER

GROUP 33
Yannick BEAUFILS
Fabio PETRONI
Larry NEVEL

Wade CRANE
Max EBERLE

GROUP 34
Darren APPLETON
Allen HOPKINS
Takeshi OKUMURA

Patrick HOLTZ
Mike DAVIS

GROUP 35
Edwin MONTAL
Markus JUVA
Markus CHAMAT

Arturo RIVERA
Ryan KELLER

GROUP 36

Carl MORRIS
Bernd JAHNKE
Jeremy JONES

Robb SAEZ
John DITORO

GROUP 37
Bobby HUNTER
Tony CHOHAN
Troy FRANK

Lance SALAZAR
Danny DILIBERTO

GROUP 38

Mick HILL
Charlie WILLIAMS
Santos SAMBAJON

Ouahbi AMINE
Alejandro CARVAJAL

GROUP 39
Chris BARTRAM
Luc SALVAS
Michael SCHMIDT

Roland ACOSTA
Frank ALVAREZ

GROUP 40
Leil GAY
Scotty TOWNSEND
Nick VAN DEN BERG


Tony CROSBY
Stan TOURANGEAU

I'm pretty sure I've sorted this correct,however,if I've made some clerical errors here, please let me know.
Thanks
RJ
Click to expand...


My young pics doing well, not too mention my UK tips...

Evgeny STALEV
Nick VAN DEN BERG
Vilmos FOLDES

Darren APPLETON
Mick HILL
Carl MORRIS

:D
 
Cornerman said:
Just to make sure I understand. The winning percentage is a tie breaker, and it means "wins per total games played." Right?

Fred
Click to expand...


Yes that's right Fred.
If you go to this link you will see McCready and Kiamco had identical winning percentages of 50%.McCready had won 27 games and lost 27,while Kiamco had won 26 and lost 26.

Since the second tie breaker, winning percentage didn't work they then went to break and runs were McCready prevailed.
RJ
 
recoveryjones said:
Yes that's right Fred.
If you go to this link you will see McCready and Kiamco had identical winning percentages of 50%.McCready had won 27 games and lost 27,while Kiamco had won 26 and lost 26.

Since the second tie breaker, winning percentage didn't work they then went to break and runs were McCready prevailed.
RJ
Click to expand...

I thought the head to head match up was the tie breaker and only break and runs and 8 on break come into play if its a 3 way tie? :confused:
 
TheOne said:
I thought the head to head match up was the tie breaker and only break and runs and 8 on break come into play if its a 3 way tie? :confused:
Click to expand...
No. It's winning percentage. This is a snipbit from the press release email dated Saturday...

In a round robin event, players are tested against their respective groups. To advance to the next round, the top players in each group need to be determined. To determine who advances, follow these criteria:

1. Match Wins in the Group - if there is one player who is undefeated, he or she obviously has the most match wins in that group. So if three players advance and three players have 5, 4, and 3 match wins respectively, with everyone else in the group having two or fewer match wins, they each advance. If there is a tie in match wins, it is broken by:

2. Total Winning Percentage - This statistic measures the percentage of games that a player wins out of all the games he played. For example, if a player beats someone 8-2, that player has won eight out of ten games and his winning percentage is 80%, whereas the other player won two out of ten for a W% of 20%. This statistic will be carried out to two decimal places. It is important to note that the winning percentage is carried over from previous rounds, so it is crucial to a player's statistics that he tries to win every single game in every match. If a player is beating someone 7-0, it has a seriously positive impact on his statistics to win the match without letting the other player get back into the match! In contrast, if a player is down 0-7, it is equally important for that player to win as many games as possible in order to positively impact his winning percentage. One poor match can result in a player losing out in a tie in the tournament or on the Money List. If someone loses on purpose, or dumps he is virtually killing himself in the end because of the negative impact those purposely lost games will have on his statistics. Remember, these statistics follow the player for the tournament and for the year. They are used to break ties on the Money List, so losing even one game on purpose is potentially detrimental to a player's future on the IPT. Using a stat like the winning percentage is designed to eliminate any dumping or match fixing. It makes every single game of every match crucial to a player's future.

In the King of the Hill, a different statistic was used. It was called the Games Lost Index (GLI). The GLI is truly the best way to test a player's dominance over an entire group. It measures the average number of games a player's opponents wins against the player. It is the perfect measure of how two players tied in wins matched up against their opponents. However, understanding how this statistic is calculated and used proved to be far too confusing and complicated for many players and fans to understand. As a result, the IPT decided to implement the second best test, which is the winning percentage method explained above, a much easier statistic to understand. To learn more about how these sorts of statistics make or break a tournament for players, look at the King of the Hill first round brackets to see how many players didn't advance due to only one or two lost games in a match. If there happens to be a tie in the W%, it is broken by:

3. Break & Run-Outs - This is the total number of Break & Run-Outs in the entire tournament. This cumulative total will come into play not only on a tournament basis, but also on the Money List. The more break & run-outs a player performs, the stronger that player's statistics will be. If there is a tie in this category, it will be broken by:

4. Eights on the Break - This is the total number of eight ball on the break wins for a player in the entire tournament. And if there is a tie after all of these criteria, it will be broken by:

5. If two players are tied, the player who beat the other player advances. If there is a three way tie, the Tournament Director and Head Referee will assess the time constraints of the tournament and other factors and determine an appropriate tie breaking mechanism.
Click to expand...

That second paragraph of point #2 is just stupid! GLI is a better system?...and the only reason they changed it was because we are too stupid to understand how it works? Why don't they just admit they screwed up by establishing that GLI system in the first place? Sheesh! :p
 
Thanks for your informative post JSP.

I like head to head before break and runs, however, Eight balls off the break should be dead last because it's totally lucky while the other two methods require skill.
RJ
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top