View Full Version : Mike Sigel wins....BUT...
I just saw on azbilliards that Mike Sigel beat Buddy 11-9...I think it was, to win the Miz Sr. Tournament.
What do you think about the situation where a guy comes from the one loss side and beats the guy on the hot seat one match and wins the tournament? I mean shouldn't the guy on the hot seat get a chance to get his two losses like everyone else? That has never seemed right to me. In this case I think Sigel should have to beat Buddy twice. Not taking sides here.....just think that it should have been done differently.
They should have had a tie breaker. It seems they had enough time. Was it 70 players over 5 days? Between those two players it is a coin toss and Buddy should have had another chance. Another race or even a single game like the women do would be better than leaving it a tie.
11-09-2003, 08:45 AM
You can look at it different ways. Both players are winners, one won the winners bracket and one won the losers bracket. The final is a one set playoff to see who wins the whole tournament. It is not like the winner of the losers bracket got some kind of pass, they actually have played and won more matches then the player on the winners side. They are both winners in my opinion and a single match playoff to see who is the champion is not unfair.
11-09-2003, 09:27 AM
I ain't no professional tournament guy but every one of the tournaments I've witnessed have dictated that you have to bet the winners side twice in the finals. Seems only rightous to me...sid
11-09-2003, 10:02 AM
Double Elimination (except in the finals, and usually a longer race)
This has been around a long time, like it or NOT (I don't) each tournament format is explained to the players during the players meeting and is usually in all the tournament promotion flyers and advertisements.
A lot of the new (younger crowds) like this format as it does set up a true FINAL match.
If it continues to be popular, I am sure I will endup making the FINAL match, just that, a FINAL match.
Winner of the Winners Bracket versus Winner of the One Loss Bracket.
But the match has to be longer than the regular tournament match race (i.e. Race to 7 for matches up to the finals, Race to 9 or 11 for the FINAL match)
11-09-2003, 10:04 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote JimS:</font><hr>I mean shouldn't the guy on the hot seat get a chance to get his two losses like everyone else? <hr /></blockquote>Yes.
11-09-2003, 10:09 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Popcorn:</font><hr> It is not like the winner of the losers bracket got some kind of pass, they actually have played and won more matches then the player on the winners side. <hr /></blockquote>They may have won more matches, but it is with one loss. The player on the winner side now has also has only one loss, so at that point, at best it is a tie.
11-09-2003, 10:48 AM
This used to disturb me too but now i like it. i dont know what you mean by how the women do it. The only one game tie breaker i know of is in the Mohegan Sun thing, where they do it for both men and women.
I stand corrected. If it's good for the women (and the men) then why not the seniors? As far as I'm concerned the tournament is a tie. A longer race just favors Sigel.
It seems the race was extended by only one game to 11 instead of 10. It's no big deal.
Nevertheless, it was a great showing by Sigel after so much time not competing.
Rick the stick
11-09-2003, 11:25 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ken:</font><hr> I stand corrected. If it's good for the women (and the men) then why not the seniors? As far as I'm concerned the tournament is a tie. A longer race just favors Sigel.
Hi this is rick, when you get into any final with Sigel, you are doomed, he wins every time.
Mike Sigel: On November 1999, billiard digest ranked the top 100 greatest players and Mike Sigel was # 5 on the list. Some quotes from that article. Not since Willie Mosconi in the 40's had a player so dominated a decade as Mike did the 80's. He was know as Mr. final. He won 85 of 95 tourneys in which he reached the final match. He is the greatest living player alive today. He was the master of straight pool and 9 ball. He has won one pocket tourneys and over 100 tournaments overall.
At age 19 he ran 339 balls. He won his first world 14.1 title at age 27 in 1979 and won again in 81 & 87. At the 89 US Open he went 150 and out on Jim Rempe. At the 92 US Open he went 150 and out on Mike Zuglan from the break. The one inning out remains a US Open record and was perhaps the most perfect 150 run every recorded on film. Steve Mizerak seeing it said Mike is the greatest player on earth. When 9 ball took over Mike won more 9 ball titles, 27 in the 1980's than any other player.
There are a lot of new players on the boards who are not aware of the position Mr. Sigel holds in the game. Those who have said some unkind things about him IMHO should read the above and then show our greatest player alive today more respect.
11-09-2003, 11:30 AM
I agree that if an event is a double elimination tournament, it should be a TRUE double elimination. I hate seeing a double elimination event with a single set finals even if the final match is extended.
I understand the purpose sometimes with pro events being under time constraints. But I still don't like it.
11-09-2003, 11:53 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rick the stick:</font><hr> There are a lot of new players on the boards who are not aware of the position Mr. Sigel holds in the game. Those who have said some unkind things about him IMHO should read the above and then show our greatest player alive today more respect. <hr /></blockquote>
I think you should go back and read what people wrote about Mr. Sigel. NO ONE disputed Mr. Sigel's playing ability. If anything, people praised his ability.
All the negative things written were about Mr. Sigel's ego and the way he mistreats his fans. We can not say enough good things about his playing ability. If you, or he, wants us to say the same good things about his personality, he has to become a better person.
11-09-2003, 02:20 PM
The only place where JPNEWT plays true double elimination is at Florence's in Binghamton, NY for any event she hosts for us.
Other than that, we play races to 7 and the finals one race to 9.
The only woman I've seen win from the 1-loss side in the finals was Karen Corr and that was just this year in the NJ State 9-ball Champs and then she beat Kim Shaw twice to win the NY State Champs, too.
11-09-2003, 02:30 PM
Have single elimination tournaments, but with matches best of three sets (race to 5-&), two out of three sets wins. Make it longer for the finals if necessary. Why not let the players play match for one hour, and the guy who has won the most racks after an hour has won the match. Usually, you woon't get more than about 10 mins after if there is tie break to be played.
11-09-2003, 04:41 PM
76 Seniors signed up for the tournament and they knew the format going in so that should be all that matters.
I sorta like it. Otherwise if the loser wins the first match it just extends the whole thing for an hour or more.
So Jake,,,,,,the goal is to get it over quickly and go home?
I think I agree with those who recommend a true double elimination program with a longer final set....or two sets if necessary.
The point was made by someone that the guy on the losers side has to win more matches to get to the finals but that can go two ways. It also means that the guy on the hot seat has not had as much opportunity to get into his game thing. Often what I've seen is that the guy from the losers side is all warmed up and ready to go with his adrenaline pumping and on a roll while the guy from the winners side has been sitting watching football for last how-many hours. He's cold, tired, bored, energy has dipped and it may often take a few games to get into it.
I think if it's double elimination it oughta be double elimination all the way and to hell with how long it takes.
11-09-2003, 06:21 PM
If a tourney is advertised as DE, then it should hold true for the entire event. In my opinion this is false advertisement and an easy way for the player who played the best until the finals to get tagged with a cheap loss and exit from the chance of capturing the top prize.
11-10-2003, 07:18 AM
If they tell you up front that it's DE with a 1 set longer final or whatever, thats how it is!, like it or not sign up or go home. It's the same for EVERYONE. If it's my choice, I'll take sitting on the 1 winners side waiting for the other matches, because I can go eat, take a walk, meditade, whatever. Yesterday in a local 9-ball it was 4 matches to the winners side, 7 to the 1-loss side. Also don't forget in the main draw for the tourny you get anyone in the tourny. On the 1-loss side the opponents keep getting tougher as the weaker players are eliminated. So IMO on the 1-loss side you play more matches without a break, play progressively tougher players, and have more of a chance to be burned out by the finals.
When you have a tournament with double elimination, usually the final match race is lengthened to make up for having to beat the person twice.
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gerry:</font><hr> On the 1-loss side the opponents keep getting tougher as the weaker players are eliminated. So IMO on the 1-loss side you play more matches without a break, play progressively tougher players, and have more of a chance to be burned out by the finals. <hr /></blockquote>
I personally think that the person playing can catch a gear and gain confidence in the 1-loss side, while the person waits on the hill, can lose some momentum. Either format is ok with me, as long as its stated up front. Pros and cons to either.
11-11-2003, 08:37 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote JimS:</font><hr> I just saw on azbilliards that Mike Sigel beat Buddy 11-9...I think it was, to win the Miz Sr. Tournament.<hr /></blockquote> Kudos to Mike Sigel. I always enjoyed watching him play.
As far as the true double-elimination question, I don't have much of a problem with it, except on certain TV events, they'd shorten the race, rather than lengthen it. That makes little sense, but TV exposure might be worth it. Of course, any TV event happenings obviously has nothing to do with me or my game.
11-12-2003, 01:03 AM
This is the format used at the US Open and it is good most of the time. The person that wins the losers bracket frequently beats and has to play more stronger players than the person that stays in winners bracket. Granted this allows time to get in stroke as it probably did in this tourney.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.