World 14.1 Faux Pas

[azhousepro]

I personally apologize for getting the details wrong on the second stage of the World 14.1 event.

I reported that the second stage was single elim when it is actually double elim until the final sixteen.

I have corrected the mistake and posted updates from matches today.

When did we go away from just plain old double elim charts and have to move to this whole "seeded-group-double elim-for awhile-single elim-unless you were seeded then you didn't play in the first round" stuff?

Hopefully all of the other sites that misreported it can fix their articles soon too.

Mike

 

[Nostroke]

I personally apologize for getting the details wrong on the second stage of the World 14.1 event.

I reported that the second stage was single elim when it is actually double elim until the final sixteen.

I have corrected the mistake and posted updates from matches today.

When did we go away from just plain old double elim charts and have to move to this whole "seeded-group-double elim-for awhile-single elim-unless you were seeded then you didn't play in the first round" stuff?

Hopefully all of the other sites that misreported it can fix their articles soon too.

Mike

It took me by surprise too. I cant quite figure out the need for a 3 stage tournament in 64 player event Then again, Im not the brightenst bulb in a Happy Meal.

 

[Black-Balled]

I forgive...

 

[NYC cue dude]

this is the 3rd year in a row that the format for the straight pool world championships has been EXACTLY THE SAME.

Randy

 

[Rich R.]

I personally apologize for getting the details wrong on the second stage of the World 14.1 event.

I reported that the second stage was single elim when it is actually double elim until the final sixteen.

I have corrected the mistake and posted updates from matches today.

When did we go away from just plain old double elim charts and have to move to this whole "seeded-group-double elim-for awhile-single elim-unless you were seeded then you didn't play in the first round" stuff?

Hopefully all of the other sites that misreported it can fix their articles soon too.

Mike

I suspect that you only reported the information you were given, as you were not the only web master to post the incorrect information.

You can't provide us with good information if you weren't given the proper information in the first place.

 

[JAM]

I suspect that you only reported the information you were given, as you were not the only web master to post the incorrect information.

You can't provide us with good information if you weren't given the proper information in the first place.

It's nice to know that some can read between the lines, Rich! As usual, you're right! :smile:

Changing match times and incorrect information being disseminated to the pool media seems like the norm for DP.

JAM

 

[StevenPWaldon]

3 stages are the way to do it, I think.

To only have a round robin stage would make things anti-climactic in the end. The winner of the event may very well be decided midway into the tournament. Not only that, but more than likely there will be no final match. You'll just count win-loss records and figure it out.

The dual-stage elimination brackets may be a time necessity. As it is, the past two years saw the event stretching into the wee hours of the morning. And this year, it seems they started earlier to avoid late-night matches and it still requires six whole days of play to finish up a tournament of only 64 players. If the elimination stage was a true double elimination, the whole thing may well take over a week to run.

It took me by surprise too. I cant quite figure out the need for a 3 stage tournament in 64 player event Then again, Im not the brightenst bulb in a Happy Meal.

 

[Str8PoolMan]

All the World's a Stage (or 3)...

3 stages are the way to do it, I think.

To only have a round robin stage would make things anti-climactic in the end. The winner of the event may very well be decided midway into the tournament. Not only that, but more than likely there will be no final match. You'll just count win-loss records and figure it out.

The dual-stage elimination brackets may be a time necessity. As it is, the past two years saw the event stretching into the wee hours of the morning. And this year, it seems they started earlier to avoid late-night matches and it still requires six whole days of play to finish up a tournament of only 64 players. If the elimination stage was a true double elimination, the whole thing may well take over a week to run.

If time is the issue, then why not have only a single elimination stage after the round robin. Going from double to single elimination at any point in a tournament makes no sense at all and is rather unfair to those in the winner's (no-loss) bracket. The WPBA has started this nonsense as well. I don't like it one bit.

I like the idea of having a round robin first stage. It keeps people from going 1 or 2 and out and gives us railbirds more matches to sweat. But if there is to be an elimination round, then stick with either double or single elimination. Ne'er the twain should meet, IMHO.

 

[Nostroke]

3 stages are the way to do it, I think.

To only have a round robin stage would make things anti-climactic in the end. The winner of the event may very well be decided midway into the tournament. Not only that, but more than likely there will be no final match. You'll just count win-loss records and figure it out.

The dual-stage elimination brackets may be a time necessity. As it is, the past two years saw the event stretching into the wee hours of the morning. And this year, it seems they started earlier to avoid late-night matches and it still requires six whole days of play to finish up a tournament of only 64 players. If the elimination stage was a true double elimination, the whole thing may well take over a week to run.

I just want to go from RR to SE.