Author Topic: Japan Cup: new format - does the best win? (Read 2192 times)

charlest · « **on:** September 21, 2007, 11:27:13 PM »

More than one very experienced PBA player has expressed serious doubts when the PBA uses this new format for the any event. Now, in order to appease the concerns of the Japanese bowlers, they have changed the format from that of total pins over many games to that of surviving 3 game matches. In such a short stretch, anyone can defeat any other player; the concern here is that the best player has not, may not have won. This seems best exemplified by this statement, in the PBA's own words:

"The anything-can-happen nature of the format reared its head in the first round, when top-seeded Mike Scroggins (Amarillo, Texas) fell to No. 64 Shigeo Saito, 2-0."

No matter what you may think of Mike Scroggins, he was at this point 64 places better than the player who "beat" him in those particular 2 games.

The point is just anything shouldn't happen; the best should make the finals, not the almost-as-good.

Yes, of course, this has been decreed to be THE format and they all abide by the rules. Does that make it the correct format to determine the winner?

Personally, I also wonder. Certainly it must have appeased the Japanese, since now many more of their bowlers have made the finals. However, when the likes of Norm Duke and Walter Ray Williams are eliminated by the round of 32, you have to wonder. (You have to forget how much you may like or hate them personally; the point is how good a player they are and have been. Even I don't want to see them make the show every week, but when you're good, you're good.)

--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

Worrying is like rocking in a rocking chair: it gives you something to do, but doesn't get you anywhere!"

shelley · « **Reply #1 on:** September 22, 2007, 10:05:29 AM »

The only real "best one wins" is to bowl a bunch of games and call the total-pins leader the winner. But it's boring as all get-out. No penalty for bowling lousy if you can come back with some good games. It's also expensive, as every bowler competes to the end (a cutline halfway through can alleviate that).

Once you get into anything with a stepladder or match play finals, though, the best may or may not win. But it's far more exciting to watch and more intense to bowl.

It's one thing that I like about the Masters. Match play is a three-game total-pins match rather than best of three. It's also double elimination, so a single bad match won't put you out.

Even leagues, though, are largely match-play based. The best team doesn't always win, whether it's a scratch league or handicapped league. I don't know of any leagues where they just give the Champion crown to the team with the highest average.

All you can do is find the balance between total pins and match play. With a very large field like the Japan Cup, a match play Round of 64 means an additional opportunity for upsets. It might have been better to cut to 64, bowl 6 more games, then cut to 32 for match play.

SH

LuckyLefty · « **Reply #2 on:** September 22, 2007, 10:17:43 AM »

I agree...after a long format qualifying the leader can easily lose in a stepladder finals even if he has been leading by 400 pins.

It's happened.

REgards,

Luckylefty
PS an analgous tournament format in golf would be...we'll play 72 holes and then we'll have the top five player play a one hole sudden death in the following order 5 - 4, winner vs 3, winner vs 2, winner vs 1.
PPS...Watch out for Ohsawa...he's hot as a pistol in match play this week!
--------------------
Open the door...see what's possible...and just walk right on through...that's how easy success feels..

Edited on 9/22/2007 10:19 AM

Edited on 9/22/2007 10:25 AM

charlest · « **Reply #3 on:** September 22, 2007, 10:57:55 AM »

Yup, the format to determine the best is often boring. That was the reason for the stepladder, single-match elmination TV format originally. The main benefit was the winner only had to bowl 1 game on TV to retain the crown he had alredy REALLY won. The bad part was when they mucked about with the oil pattern, making it hard or making the transitions hard. Then the guy who won the semi-finals had a MAJOR advantage.

So to make it exciting, we just have sudden-death playoffs all the time. The only winner remains the PBA owners. How interesting!
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

Worrying is like rocking in a rocking chair: it gives you something to do, but doesn't get you anywhere!"

APheLion · « **Reply #4 on:** September 22, 2007, 01:33:27 PM »

omg Ohsawa got duke wrw and loschetter 6-0, thats impressive!
--------------------
When a house bowler misses the mark, misses the break point and strike, for many ppl its called a wallshot. When a pro does that its call adjustment

When a house bowler gets his finger stuck in the ball and fall on the lanes, for many ppl its called lame bowler. When a pro does that its called the Machuga flop! ha i like this one.

boondoggle · « **Reply #5 on:** September 22, 2007, 04:10:29 PM »

if i'm looking at the scores right... there's only 2 PBA in the final 8, Mika and Mike Wolfe...

Potentially an all Japanese final... prolly not what the PBA or ESPN expected... but I wouldn't mind getting to see some of these guys bowl.

I haven't read any background on the tournament this year that mentions the pattern but I have to suspect considering the scores that it's a pattern the Japanese are familiar with that's very different from what the PBA guys have been bowling all. Even considering a "home pattern" advantage though... to lock out the PBA guys like they have is pretty impressive.

charlest · « **Reply #6 on:** September 22, 2007, 06:41:19 PM »

quote:
Even considering a "home pattern" advantage though... to lock out the PBA guys like they have is pretty impressive.

The point of my post, originally, and basically, was that No, it's not impressive. It's more a matter of luck. In this format, the best does NOT rise to the top. There's a LARGE degree of randomness has been added into the equation to find the finalists.
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

Worrying is like rocking in a rocking chair: it gives you something to do, but doesn't get you anywhere!"

boondoggle · « **Reply #7 on:** September 23, 2007, 09:43:21 AM »

I would agree with you more if the format was 1 game. Best of 3 with a while previous round bowling this pattern and bowling center to get sorted out?

Fluff E Bunnie · « **Reply #8 on:** September 24, 2007, 12:35:45 PM »

This new format sounds stupid to me. They aren't doing this for the other tournaments are they?

shelley · « **Reply #9 on:** September 24, 2007, 12:40:10 PM »

quote:
This new format sounds stupid to me. They aren't doing this for the other tournaments are they?

The Japan Cup has always run its tournament how they choose. It's a PBA title but it's not run by the PBA. Probably they have their opinions on how it should be done, but it's a JPBA tournament.

So far as I know, this year's standard tournaments will be similar to last year's: PTQs for a half-dozen spots, two 7-game blocks in the round of 64, cut to 32 and do either best-of-7 match play down to 4 or do 9 games of round robin to cut to 16, then 9 more to cut to the 5-man stepladder.

SH

revTrex · « **Reply #10 on:** September 24, 2007, 01:38:09 PM »

If you look at who eliminated who, also notice that, by a brilliant stroke of luck, several PBA players eliminated each other, reducing their chances of making the show.

At some point, match-play is going to have to be accepted as the dominant form of tournament "ending." It may not be the best format, but what else is there that can be readily sold to the masses? It's very much like the playoffs in any sport, or March Madness in college basketball -- the best might not always win, but...there is this certain excitement, no? Moreover, in many cases, the best do win -- one would have to expect, at some point, for the man who finished 63 places better than the other man, to finish ahead of him again the next day. Just like we expect Florida or Duke to roll over opponents, so should we expect the leader...leading might deserve winning it all, but it should also bear the responsibility of having to defend that title, and do so no matter the format.

Fluff E Bunnie · « **Reply #11 on:** September 24, 2007, 03:26:10 PM »

quote:
At some point, match-play is going to have to be accepted as the dominant form of tournament "ending."

I don't know, I think the stepladder is much more entertaining to watch.

Edited on 9/24/2007 3:26 PM

revTrex · « **Reply #12 on:** September 24, 2007, 03:56:02 PM »

I think stepladder is better too. But TV networks I think like match-play, as it uses less time too...

This might not be realistic, but what if this was the format (there are A LOT of games bowled, but this shouldn't be a problem, right? I mean, they used to bowl a ton of games, back in the days of the BPAA match-play tournament, etc.):

OPEN qualifying x 9 games, cut to 64 (open qualifying = more entries = reduced entry fee, maybe even do a multiple entry thing like the European Tour does...)
Qualifying x 36 games, cut to 32
Qualifying cont., 9 games, cut to 17, #1 qualifier earns "show"
2-17, individual matchplay, three game combined series, until you get 4...
1 + the 4 from matchplay advance, 6 games additional qualifying "added on to the first 54 games" -- giving credit where credit is due by making the first 54 games count...
Stepladder final on television - 5 vs. 4, winner vs. 3, winner vs. 2, winner vs. 1

That allows the best bowler from qualifying the chance to win, plus rewards match play competition. It seems like a good balance, no?

Author Topic: Japan Cup: new format - does the best win? (Read 2192 times)

charlest

Japan Cup: new format - does the best win?

shelley

Re: Japan Cup: new format - does the best win?

LuckyLefty

Re: Japan Cup: new format - does the best win?

charlest

Re: Japan Cup: new format - does the best win?

APheLion

Re: Japan Cup: new format - does the best win?

boondoggle

Re: Japan Cup: new format - does the best win?

charlest

Re: Japan Cup: new format - does the best win?

boondoggle

Re: Japan Cup: new format - does the best win?

Fluff E Bunnie

Re: Japan Cup: new format - does the best win?

shelley

Re: Japan Cup: new format - does the best win?

revTrex

Re: Japan Cup: new format - does the best win?

Fluff E Bunnie

Re: Japan Cup: new format - does the best win?

revTrex

Re: Japan Cup: new format - does the best win?