The first round has concluded and only one surprise team had advanced: the Netherlands which despite hitting only .137 in their 4 games managed to stun the mighty Dominicans twice, the second time with a bottom of the 11th rally down 1-0. The tournament now break into two double elimination pools with teams reaching the sudden death semi-finals as soon as they acheive two wins. The first games of round 2 are:
Japan v. Cuba (rematch of the 2006 championship game)
Korea v. Mexico
Netherlands v. Venezuela
Puerto Rico v. US
The favorites in the first bracket are Japan and Cuba with Mexico being a longshot. In the second, the US would be a heavy favorite, with Puerto Rico perhaps having a slight edge over the Venezuela for the other qualifying spot. If the Netherlands make it to the semis, it will be one of the biggest surprises in recent sports history.
I'm really enjoying this. There's much more of a sense of urgency in the double elimination format than in the 160-odd game format of the major leagues.
The Dutch pitching and fielding (is that the correct term? I'm a bit of a newcomer to baseball.) has been great. It's been fun to see a country I wouldn't have associated with baseball at all beating much more fancied teams.
Originally posted by SchumiIt is because of this format that the teams like the Netherlands have any chance at all. Were this a 162 game season, they would be crushed. But when you have a format that allows for the "On any given day, any given team could beat another given team - one time" axiom to be employed.
I'm really enjoying this. There's much more of a sense of urgency in the double elimination format than in the 160-odd game format of the major leagues.
The Dutch pitching and fielding (is that the correct term? I'm a bit of a newcomer to baseball.) has been great. It's been fun to see a country I wouldn't have associated with baseball at all beating much more fancied teams.
It is more exciting because their is the constant threat of elimination, but it does not always ensure that the best team wins.
Originally posted by shortcircuitThe USA is down n' dirty against Venezuela tonight in my hometown. Should bring out about 50,000 or so.
It is because of this format that the teams like the Netherlands have any chance at all. Were this a 162 game season, they would be crushed. But when you have a format that allows for the "On any given day, any given team could beat another given team - one time" axiom to be employed.
It is more exciting because their is the constant threat of elimination, but it does not always ensure that the best team wins.
Originally posted by MoneyManMikeGrow up; since when "should" you root for a team just because it's a "local" one?
Well no1marauder, the team you were rooting for got eliminated in the second round and the team you should have been rooting for is in the semis; does this mean you are going to defect back to the American side or are you gonna go "asiatic?"
Originally posted by no1marauderWhile you are at it, why root at all?
Grow up; since when "should" you root for a team just because it's a "local" one?
Will your rooting in any way change the outcome? NO
Do you gain a moral victory if "your team" wins? In your case..YES
Do you lose social status if "your team" loses? HARDLY, although in your case....
Do you gain financially based on the outcome? That depends on your guts.
Do you wager on the teams you "root" for...especially when you elect to root for underdogs? Maybe, again it depends on your guts.
Originally posted by shortcircuitA rooting interest makes the game more interesting to watch. I do often bet on teams I root for (which seem to be in the great majority of cases underdogs) though not in this case (no one was interested in a wager).
While you are at it, why root at all?
Will your rooting in any way change the outcome? NO
Do you gain a moral victory if "your team" wins? In your case..YES
Do you lose social status if "your team" loses? HARDLY, although in your case....
Do you gain financially based on the outcome? That depends on your guts.
Do you wager on the teams you "root" ...[text shortened]... r...especially when you elect to root for underdogs? Maybe, again it depends on your guts.
Originally posted by no1marauderNot to a purist of the game. A purist would watch the game and enjoy it for what it is, and then project about what might have been or what might have changed the outcome. If you need a "vested interest" in order to watch the game, then the game is not what you are interested in....only its outcome.
A rooting interest makes the game more interesting to watch.
Originally posted by shortcircuitI don't know anyone who's that much of a "purist". Your last sentence is rubbish; do you know the difference between "more interesting" and "interesting"?
Not to a purist of the game. A purist would watch the game and enjoy it for what it is, and then project about what might have been or what might have changed the outcome. If you need a "vested interest" in order to watch the game, then the game is not what you are interested in....only its outcome.
Originally posted by no1marauderYour lack of knowledge does not change the fact that purists do exist.
I don't know anyone who's that much of a "purist". Your last sentence is rubbish; do you know the difference between "more interesting" and "interesting"?
Your lack of comprehension skills does not make a valid statement rubbish.
LOL Soemthing is either interesting or it is not. You feel the need to add degrees of separation on everything you do?