Disclaimer: CurlingZone does not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any Content posted on any Forums area and you acknowledge that any reliance upon such Content shall be at your sole risk. Any Content placed on any Forums area by users and anonymous posters are the views of the user posting the statement, and do not represent the views of CurlingZone or our partners, advertisers or sponsors. By posting anonymously, you are allowing your IP address to be displayed for identification purposes. CurlingZone reserves the right to remove any post at its discretion without warning or explanation.
I agree it is a cash grab. If three teams tied why do two get such a big advantage? Many different scenarios but they can't be avoided with a round robin and it does seem to be the format of choice for a Canadian championship.
So now Northern Ontario, who defeated Team Canada in a playoff match will have to play Team Canada again for the Bronze, and Manitoba, who defeated Ontario in a playoff match will have to play Ontario again for the gold.
I can't be the only person who sees how ridiculous this is.
3 teams in the playoffs, semi and then final. Marginal teams with questionable records, should not be included in ties breakers (eg. 5-4). What so often occurs, is that 6-7 teams are still in the running for a playoff birth, after the round robin. That in it self, discounts the importance of the round robin.
While I don't agree the Page is the best format, it does do what you're saying and make the Round Robin more important while at the same time giving more teams a chance at the playoffs.
Finishing first or second is a huge advantage in the Page system as you only need to win 2 games of which only 1 is sudden death. Coming out of the 3/4 is uncommon as teams have to play 3 sudden death games to win the event.
As for format, I'd rather see a floating playoff structure based on the standings. If someone is well clear of the field they should get a bye directly to the final. If there's two teams with a game of each other at the top or tied, use the page. If there's 3-4 teams all grouped together, the straight SF and Final format makes more sense.
quote:As for format, I'd rather see a floating playoff structure based on the standings. If someone is well clear of the field they should get a bye directly to the final. If there's two teams with a game of each other at the top or tied, use the page. If there's 3-4 teams all grouped together, the straight SF and Final format makes more sense. [/B]
The problem with the top team going directly to the final is that they don't get to play any other game with just one sheet in action and most likely the fullest arena. You can argue that the best team should be able to handle this, but ice conditions are different and it's an unfair advantage for the team coming through the semi.
I really disagree with it in the juniors that employ the one semi and winner plays top seed where the games are now televised. These kids play well with 4 or 5 sheets all week, now they cover them up with carpet, put in bleachers and put cameras in their face. The team that won the semi has a HUGE advantage in the final given they aren't deer in headlights.
While the page is not a perfect set up, I feel it is best of all formats possible. No system is perfect, and I think this one has the least wrong with it.
Registered: Feb 2017
Location: Livonia, MI
They might be at a disadvantage in the finals if that is their only game. But, if they have to play through the normal page system...assuming that most playoff teams are very close in skill level. They only have about a 37.5% chance of winning. I highly doubt they lose that much equity by being forced to only play one game in the playoffs.
I bet if you ask any first place team if they'd rather be put right in the finals, and not be as fresh as their opponent...or play one or two games prior and possibly be eliminated...they'll take the ticket to the finals.