Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 2 members: TABLE SETTER 11, kotonk; 154 anonymousDiscussion: Seeding
| Posted | Discussion |
| Oct. 3, 2012 local 169 posts | Seeding After playing in Worlds last week I came to the conclusion that there has to be a better way to do seeding. In the second round we ended up playing a team that always placed high in other tournaments they played in yet they were a 20+seed. I know they had a very tough draw for round robin while other teams had very easy draws and had a more favorable seed. I realize it's impossible to make everyone happy. Why not make qualifying tournaments like Westerns, Easterns, Reno and others worth something at the end of the year. Why not give points to teams that placed in these tournaments to be used as "runs against" went determining who is placed where for seeding. If you win Reno you would recieve minus 10 runs against for seeding at Worlds. If you place 2nd you get 7 and so on. A team could win all the Major tournaments for the year and end up a 20+ seed because they got a very tough draw or they had an "off game". Having these other tournaments mean something other than just winning them may increase attendance too. Just a thought. Worlds were great and the fields should be on everyone's bucket list. |
| Oct. 3, 2012 stig1 Men's 60 32 posts | You are right, for example in the 60AAA where there were 38 teams seeding games did not mean a thing. I would like to see the Eastern and Western champions game not only determine the USA Champion but also be for the number 1 and 2 seeds. It's not fair to those to teams to play a seeding game against each other. |
| Oct. 3, 2012 Dbax Men's 65 2100 posts | Great idea. As it sits now, seeding games are a joke. |
| Oct. 7, 2012 tanker39 Men's 60 6 posts | The seeding format IMO really sucked. What the hell are playing games for when using W-L followed by RA (runs allowed). How do teams that went 0-2 get seeded higher than teams that were 1-1 and 2-0. If anything assign us number, put it on a ping-pong ball throw them in the machine. Just like BINGO! |
| Oct. 7, 2012 turn2 489 posts | An 0-2 team can't be seeded ahead of a 1 win team. maybe your coach should have kept an eye on the bracket. They tried to give our 65 a 2 seed when I had told them it should be a 1 seed. It was a three way tie and they had some problems before I brought it to theie attention. Trust no one. |
| Oct. 7, 2012 local 169 posts | There cannot be a 3 way tie. They have several tie breakers in place if there are more than one 2-0 team. Believe me they used it in the 38 team AAA 60's. We were 2-0 and ended up 7th seed after they figured out runs against etc.. We didn't have a problem with it. |
| Oct. 7, 2012 DoubleL10 Men's 70 907 posts | local, there WAS a three-way tie in the 65 M+. Three teams were 2-1 and the seeds were determined by runs allowed per SSUSA rules. Turn 2 got the 1 seed, Florida Thunder the 2 seed and Omen the 3 seed. |
| Oct. 7, 2012 local 169 posts | Your right, we had a 8 team tie for first seed but the tie is there until they go to the second tie breaker " Runs against" and so on. I guess I misunderstood what you were saying. I would hope that SSUSA takes a look at my suggestion about awarding point from other tournaments in determining seeding. I agree with stig1. Both Western and Eastern Champions should be seeded 1 and 2 at Worlds. |
