Joined: 18 Sep 2003 Posts: 137 Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted: Sun Jun 27, 2010 8:51 pm Post subject: WFC 2010 - Footbag Net Seeding - embed/link
Hi all, I'm happy to post the FIRST DRAFT of the seeding of the Open Singles and Open Doubles Net events for the 2010 World Footbag Championships. I'm the Net Director for the 2010 WFC. Myself and a staff of about 8 people will be maintaining the seeding.
This is a living document and will be updated based on registration and event results until worlds begins. We will likely update it weekly or more until then.
The Sooner You Register The Sooner You Get To See And Debate Your Seed.
Our goal is to provide some transparency to the seeding process and give everyone a chance for input ensuring the cleanest seeding. Come tournament time we want no surprises, if not controversy.
So, should you have any questions/input please don't hesitate to express it here. You can also email me directly at ewulff@footbag.org.
Thank You! I'm sure I'll hear from at least some of you soon
Of course, you can also view it here. This is current as of June 27th, 2010
Open Singles:
1 Pohjola, Matti 2291
2 Tuomas Kärki 1475
3 Demers, Gilles 1658
4 John Leys 341
5 Siebert, Chris 796
6 Depatie-Pelletier, Francois 983
7 Deschenes, Alexis 338
8 Schrickel, Patrick
9 Mirken, Jeremy 971
10 Vu, Tuan 520
11 Lezama, Victor 504
12 Marquez, Carlos 431
13 Harris, Jack 384
14 Current, Cory 281
15 Bradley, Vincent 475
16 Greer, Daniel 288
17 Duchesne, Sébastien 269
18 Veltman, Edwin 202
19 Uusitalo, Janne 197
20 Loreto, Oscar 172
21 DeClercq, Jake 114
22 Vozar, Tim 102
23 Baron, Dan 100
24 DeClercq, Josh 94
25 Young, Chris 85
multiple world titles as a team: ****; multiple world titles: **; world title: *; major titles as a team: $$$$; major title: $; tournament title; #
Open Doubles: Teams - Registered points 1st player points 2nd player total notes
1 Florian Goetze / Patti Schrickel 2947 1675 4622 ****
2 P.T. Lovern / Emmanuel Bouchard 2885 3113 5998 ** / **
3 François Pelletier / Gilles Demers 2471 2200 4671 $$$$
4 Tuomas Kärki / Jani Markkanen 1470 2299 3769 $$
5 Christopher Siebert / Kenny Shults 882 394 1276 * / **
6 Eric Wulff / Luke Legault 545 1803 2348 $
7 Matti Pohjola / Janne Uusitalo 1896 419 2315 $
8 Jeremy Mirken / Jack Harris 1173 1092 2265 ##
9 Tuan Vu / Alexis Deschenes 913 644 1557 # / *
10 Jim Derricott / Steve Dusablon 115 437 552
11 Carlos Márquez / Oscar Loreto 554 541 1095
12 Cory Current / Scot Hansen 208 99 307
13 Daniel Greer / Chris Cleaver 360 223 583
14 Josh DeClercq / Jake DeClercq 159 159 318
15 Chris Young / Fletcher Funk 118 58 176
16 Chris Young / Fletcher Funk 118 58 176
Joined: 21 Aug 2007 Posts: 91 Location: Wheaton, IL, USA
Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 1:59 pm Post subject:
I don't think you should let Fletch and Chris compete twice. It's not fair to the rest of us.
I also think that Cory and I should be seeded higher, but that could just be my positive thinking and high level of self-esteem. I don't have much evidence to back it up other than that we seemed to play pretty equally against the likes of Jack and Jer at the WCC. Playing well at ONE tournament is not a real strong argument, though, so I'm willing to let you seed us wherever you want and we'll just have to go out and prove it on the court. Cory may disagree, but he has his own footbag.org account and I'm quite sure he knows how to use it.
Joined: 18 Sep 2003 Posts: 137 Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 6:14 am Post subject:
Hey Scot, I hear you and thx for the reply. This is the tipping point right now... everyone seeded over you and scott have at least one team member, if not both, that have won a tournament, if not several, and sometimes major tournament(s) and/or world champion.
i heard at euros that no pools will be played and thought it was a joke.
but reading chris' mail i found the part where it is announced, that for a 7-day tourney with whopping 25 entrants you really plan to spare the round robin.
thats just ridicoulus, isnt it? we just played with 50+ players on a single day until semifinals. that sure is a little too much, but defining the world champion on a 50%seeding basis sounds really stupid to me.
whats the sense behind it?. playing one game per day maximum? who made that decision and why? if i would fly 10000km for a tourney i would expect more than a good chance to get kicked out in 1st round.
For me (and a lot of other players) worlds and euros are the chance to make as much competetive games as possible, learn by getting hard matches, learn by making a lot of games. not pickups, pressure i mean.
Joined: 19 Sep 2003 Posts: 321 Location: Oakland, CA, USA
Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2010 7:08 am Post subject:
Its 3 in the morning and I've had a few drinks, but I'm gonna make a statement here:
'5 Christopher Siebert / Kenny Shults 882 394 1276 * / **
6 Eric Wulff / Luke Legault 545 1803 2348 $
7 Matti Pohjola / Janne Uusitalo 1896 419 2315 $
8 Jeremy Mirken / Jack Harris 1173 1092 2265 ##
9 Tuan Vu / Alexis Deschenes 913 644 1557 # / *
10 Jim Derricott / Steve Dusablon 115 437 552
11 Carlos Márquez / Oscar Loreto 554 541 1095
12 Cory Current / Scot Hansen 208 99 307 '
To me this is ALL WRONG.
First of all, what is getting the most weight here, ranking points? Titles? Tourney experience? Historical performance? I mean, none of this shit is clearly defined, and so I cannot validate any of this.
Example 1: Matti and Janne recently won a Finnish tourney, yet they're ranked below Eric and Luc, who've never even played a pick up game together? WTF? Are you serious right now?
If you're gonna go by ranking points, go by ranking points, end of story. But don't go guessing putting certain teams above others just based on past performance.
And at last year's worlds, didnt they rank almost purely based on previous years' Worlds performance?
I want to know exactly which factors are getting the most weight, and what exactly the weighting is. Thanks.
Good point Jer. My question is : why arent PT and I first? I mean, the points are not even close. 1300+ points ahead of Flo and Patti.
So is it the number of world championships? guess not since we are ahead there too. Are we a new team?...
So the only answer to that is that the only thing that matters is last year result at worlds? then why did we bother putting ourselves out there 4 times this year? and why dont we just take last year results and do rankings with it?
No offense to Flo and Patti, but they are ranked 2nd
Joined: 18 Sep 2003 Posts: 137 Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2010 6:04 pm Post subject:
To Jer - yes I'm serious. I won't answer to folks that respond drunk and/or WTF style. I'm not sure about the rest of the 8 or so folks consulting on this seeding process but I suspect they'd have the same attitude - namely John Leys, Matti, Gilles, Chris S, Grischa, and others.
So, try again when you're sober and, um, not being a - yeah.
Joined: 18 Sep 2003 Posts: 137 Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2010 6:12 pm Post subject:
For Manu - thx for voicing your opinion!
I think it's clear who the number 1 seed is and who the no. 2 seed is. The defending world champions have beaten the #2 seed the last 2 times they played against each other and each time it was the final of a major event. They also have 3 world titles together.
You are the only person that has voiced any surprise about this seed. I'm definitely NOT closed to the idea of a change. I would need to see/hear more evidence than rank points and more from other folks.
Rank points never have been the only factor involved in the seeding process.
Joined: 18 Sep 2003 Posts: 137 Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2010 6:20 pm Post subject:
Hi Justin, our reasons for straight to brackets in singles are many. Mainly, singles is a grueling event and takes longer to play than doubles usually and we have limited courts compared to years past. Also, this is the world championships so it's not time for practice - during the competition anyway. All players will still play a significant number of matches and no player is ever eliminated - just from contention for first, etc.
Every player, whether they finish 1st or last, will play the exact same number of matches.
I'll try to answer in more detail later but I wanted to at least get you something quick here.
Also, John Leys may be able to speak to this as he's the driving force behind the idea - and I agree 100%.
Also, this is not the first major event were singles is run in this manner. Several Green Cups, Montreal events and others have a singles bracket like this. It's the direction the sport is heading in general.
Joined: 21 Aug 2007 Posts: 91 Location: Wheaton, IL, USA
Posted: Fri Jul 02, 2010 1:37 pm Post subject:
I'm surprised this topic doesn't have more replies. I guess people are busy trying to improve their seed!
To Jer- I appreciate your passion, and I know that you know you could have handled yourself more professionally. The fact is that there is no one set way to figure this out. I personally would favor using rankings and rankings alone, but I also know that there are too many external factors that create anomalies in the ranking system to base it solely on that. So, a group of about 8 or 10 heavily-involved tournament directors put together what was clearly published as a FIRST DRAFT. It was published on June 27th- more than a month before the event- for the sole purpose of allowing the entire community to voice their opinions and debate the issue. There's no reason for anger. You're right- none of this shit is clearly defined. The part you're missing is that we need YOU (and everyone else!) to validate it!
Having said that, I personally agree with your assessment of the Fins and the comparison to Eric and Luc. I also think that Manu makes an incredibly valid point about putting themselves out there 4 times this year. I don't agree that Patti and Flo should get the #1 seed just because they won it all last year. I'm not saying that PT and Manu should have the #1 seed either, I'm just saying that I don't see it quite as clearly as Eric does.
To Eric, lets say hypothetically that Pt and I win all 4 tourney we go to this year, Flo and Patti dont play one tourney, we get 2nd seed? that means there is absolutely nothing we can do to get the first seed, so why even bother to go to any tourney? since we will keep our second seed anyweay? what kind of message does that send to players, dont go to tourney, it wont change anything.
Anyway, just wanna make sure Patti and flo knows they are the underdogs
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
