2009 Paris Masters BOTB pick 'em - entries close at 13.30 GMT on Sunday

goldfish · Futures qualifying

RE: 2009 Paris Masters BOTB pick 'em - entries close at 13.30 GMT on Sunday

goldfish · Futures qualifying

Quote from Steven on Andymurray.com community site at 16.39:

'I'd do an update but 'free'webs and hence BT.net seems to be down.'

eblunt · Club Coach

So it's not just me then. Seems to be a DNS problem rather than the website being down from what I can see.

steven · Tennis legend

PARIS MASTERS BOTB - DAY 3 'SYNDICATED' REPORT

Tuesday was yet another day when the GEMs misbehaved, with 8% pick Clement beating F-Loppy and 68% pick Chardy losing to Monaco. All four R2 matches went with the majority though.

Once the BT.net web host gets its act together and comes back up (apologies for the ridiulously long outage, it's not under my control I'm afraid), detailed results will be found at http://www.britishtennis.net/competitions.html, with 'headlines' appearing on http://twitter.com/botb1 as well.

TEAMS

Tennisopolis edged out the two Murray teams to win R1 and they are 100% for R2 so far too, up 2 to 1st overall. AM.com slipped 1 to 2nd but JM.org climbed a place to 3rd. The Feddies dropped out of the top three, down 2 to 4th, and hence are no longer the 'virtual' world no. 1 team.

The Daily Forehand had an excellent day, climbing 3 to 3rd, and they probably waved to TAT, who passed them on their way down 5 to last place, while BT.net climbed 2 of the bottom to 8th.

INDIVIDUALS

Four of the six overnight leaders went for Chiudinelli to reach R2 and when he failed to beat Almagro, the leading group went down to two entrants, who stayed ahead for the rest of the day - Darius (IN) & Jelena Jankovic fan (IN) are both on 21/24.

Jose Javier/Buyaka86 (RF) & Mom of Twins (IN), up 13 to 3=, were two of just three entrants who managed to score 12 points on day 3. The latter has not managed to finish outside the bottom 10% in six attempts so far, so well done to her, though it may also tell you all you need to know about what a GEM of a tournament this has been so far ...

Also in 3= just one point behind the leaders are LindaB (JM) & EKGuy39 (AM), both up 4 after scoring 11 points on day 3, and fil-813 (IN), down 2 after scoring 10.

12 entrants share 8th place a further point back, of whom the highest ranked is world no. 59 minnie me (JM) - this group also contains former world no. 1s Pebs (MP) & speedy hawk (AM), both up 8, and former world no. 4 WimbledonAce (AM), down 7. The lowest-ranked member of this group is LT's dad, KingTiger (IN), up 8.

ON THE RISE

The third entrant who equal top scored with 12 on Tuesday, Yorkie (AM), leads the fastest risers list by miles after moving up 137 to 51=, with Nevets (CC), up 90 to 98=, the next biggest climber.

DODGY DROPPERS

Oploskoffie (TA), down 134 to 202=, and doublelix (AR), down 66 to 206th, equal bottom scored on Tuesday with just 4 points, the latter joining mintsauce (AM), down 4 to last, in the now much emptier cage.

However, the biggest fallers (after scoring 6 on day 3) were nelslus (TA), Suliso (TA), Kamui010 (MT) & JTContinental (TA), all down 139 to 155=. It's not hard to see why TAT dropped to last in the teams comp, is it!

WEDNESDAY

CC-1 - R2 - (3) Nole 100% v Monaco 0% (nobody)
C1-1 - R2 - (9) the Sod 81% v Ivo 19%
CC-2 - R2 - (5) Potty 91% v (WC) Safin 9%
C1-2 - R2 - (16) Haas 55% v (Q) Clement 3%
CC-3 - R2 - (2) Rafa 100% v Almagro 0% (nobody)
C1-3 - R2 - (10) Gonzo 78% v Isner 21% - can Gonzo overcome his 0-6 record at Bercy?
C1-4 - R2 - (14) Robredo 51% v Berdbrain 48%
CC-4 - R2 - (15) Monfils 53% v (Q) Guez 0% (nobody)
C1-5 - R2 - (1) Fed 100% v Benneteau 0% (nobody)
C1-5 - R2 - (12) Cilic 99% v (Q) Kubot 0% (nobody)
CC-6 - R2 - (4) Muzza 100% v Flake 0% (1 entrant)
C1-6 - R2 - (13) Count Duckula 88% v Tricky 1%

So, five players have not been picked by anyone and only Robredo v Berdbrain is anywhere close to a 50:50 match!

-- Edited by steven on Wednesday 11th of November 2009 01:17:41 PM

goldfish · Futures qualifying

you could view the Haas and Monfils matches as somewhere near 50/50 since nearly 50% didn't choose them. Also, just for the record, Cilic is seeded 12.

eblunt · Club Coach

goldfish wrote:

you could view the Haas and Monfils matches as somewhere near 50/50 since nearly 50% didn't choose them. Also, just for the record, Cilic is seeded 12.

Yes, although hardly anyone has Clement or Guez, those are potenial 'net gain' matches for the half of us that have King GEM and Haas, although the only have half the 'net swing' of a true 50/50 match

Net swing = ((100 - % on your pick) + % on other pick) * points
----------------------------------------------------------------
100

This represents the relative points difference to your position between your pick winning or losing.

Net gain = (100 - % on your pick ) * points
-----------------------------------------
100

Which represents how many points you gain relative to other players if your pick wins

So for example, Monfils is a potential 47/100 * 2 = 0.94 of a net point gain for me ( but also the same swing since there's no-one on the other pick. Obviously I've just wasted that effort since he'll now lose, but the formula still stands.

steven · Tennis legend

goldfish wrote:

you could view the Haas and Monfils matches as somewhere near 50/50 since nearly 50% didn't choose them. Also, just for the record, Cilic is seeded 12.

I knew he was, so I'm not sure how that got missed ashamed

I agree that the Haas and Monfils matches are the next level down in order of importance, but as eblunt has explained, they're not quite the same as matches where almost everyone is bound to gain or lose two points on half of the rest of the field whatever happens.

eblunt · Club Coach

Steven,

Is there anyway to dilute the round 2 seeds effect in these types of tournaments with 48 players ? These very little motivation to pick anything else but all the seeds winning in round 2 , since your rd2 pick might come unstuck in round 1 ( e.g. Stan and Lopez). By sticking to rd2 seed winners you guarantee all winning picks standing for rd2.

How about if it was the winner of the match in rd1 that was deemed to be your pick in rd2 ? E.G. If you selected Stan, you would lose the point for rd1, but would still have Guez running in rd2 ?

As it stands, I'm guessing that all the '16 seeds to win rd2' players will be pretty close to the top by the time rd2 ends, almost making as though the real competition starts in rd3

The Knight · Challenger qualifying

i can imagine there are some very happy people on here now that Marat has retired!

eblunt · Club Coach

No I'm NOT happy. Why is it that misery always strikes from a totally unexpected quarter in this game. Well, not totally unpecpected, there's always a GEM involved. When they're not busy losing when then damn well should have won, they're winning when they should have lost.

Basically all was fine for me then Fed goes out to a GEM after being a set up. I'm going to have to flounce off in a sulk now

Silver · County player

Fed could be an honorary GEM for today.

The stupid GEM.

steven · Tennis legend

eblunt wrote:

Steven,

Is there anyway to dilute the round 2 seeds effect in these types of tournaments with 48 players ? These very little motivation to pick anything else but all the seeds winning in round 2 , since your rd2 pick might come unstuck in round 1 ( e.g. Stan and Lopez). By sticking to rd2 seed winners you guarantee all winning picks standing for rd2.

How about if it was the winner of the match in rd1 that was deemed to be your pick in rd2 ? E.G. If you selected Stan, you would lose the point for rd1, but would still have Guez running in rd2 ?

As it stands, I'm guessing that all the '16 seeds to win rd2' players will be pretty close to the top by the time rd2 ends, almost making as though the real competition starts in rd3

It's possible, of course, and I understand what you're trying to achieve (indeed, in many ways it would be a fairer system), but it's quite a bit of hassle to set up for relatively little gain plus people tend to enjoy BOTB more the more players they have going deep into the draw, and encouraging people to make riskier picks in R2 by doing something like this would be liable to tend to reduce the amount of time they had an interest in the competition, if that makes any sense.

steven · Tennis legend

PARIS MASTERS BOTB - DAY 4 'SYNDICATED' REPORT

Only two of the 16 seeds bit the dust in R2, but one of them was a big one - 56% of entrants lost their overall winner pick when Benneteau shocked Fed, as predicted by 250000 of the one million gorillas but nobody else, though with 95% of entrants picking Fed to reach the semis, his loss won't have a big adverse effect on those who picked him to win the title until then.

Indeed, if Muzza goes out early, Fed's loss won't be that noticeable until the Final, though those apparently deluded souls who picked le Monf to beat Fed in R3 or Verdasco to reach the semis must be feeling vindicated now!

Detailed results can be found at http://www.britishtennis.net/competitions.html, with 'headlines' appearing on http://twitter.com/botb1 as well.

TEAMS

Tennisopolis have now won both of the first two rounds, so they stay in 1st place ahead of the two Murray teams, JM.org, up 1 to 2nd, and AM.com, down 1 to 3rd.

The Feddies have held onto 4th place, but the delayed effect of their hero's loss on Wednesday will probably be to take his team out of the fight for the year-end no. 1 spot.

In fact, all of the top five teams in the overall rankings are outside the top three in Paris at the moment. They include the day's biggest risers, BT.net, up 2 to 6th, and world no. 2s TAT, up 2 to 7th just behind world no. 1s Rusedski.co.uk, while The Daily Forehand, down 5 to last, were easily the day's biggest fallers.

INDIVIDUALS

With Fed and Haas (who eventually out-muppeted Clément in a long, dire match) the only seeds to lose in R2, 36 entrants managed to equal top score in R2 with 14/16 correct and virtually all of them got 10/12 correct on day 4.

They include new joint leaders LindaB (JM), EKGuy39 (AM) and that entrant who has never finished outside the bottom 10% before in six previous attempts, Mom of Twins (IN), all up 2 and on 40/48.

Overnight leaders Darius (IN) & Jelena Jankovic fan (IN) 'only' got 9/12 correct on day 4 and were down 3 at 4=, but 10/12 for minnie me (JM), Speedy Hawk (AM), Sue (TN) & Anna (IN) saw them all climb 2 places to 6=, while Jose Javier/Buyaka86 (RF) & fil-813 (IN) both dropped 7 places to 10=. The top 32 are all within one R3 win of the leaders.

ON THE RISE

The biggest risers on day 4 were four more of those who got 14/16 correct in R2 as a whole - emf123 (IN), Imoen (BT) (well done to my co-organiser!), dusty dick (BT) & Alien (CC), all up 87 to 86=.

DODGY DROPPERS

Three entrants suffered triple-digit drops on day 4 - WallaceEMann (GR) dropped 127 to 148= and ph1988 (DF) dropped 123 to 174= after getting 6/12 correct, but Marion Bernard (ND), down 163 to 184=, was the biggest faller of all after getting just 5/12 correct on Wednesday, a day 4 score matched only by quietplease (BB), down 33 to 2nd last.

Nobody failed to score at least 50% for R2 as a whole, but doublelix (AR), up 1 to 3rd last on Wednesday, and Ghandi (GR), down 5 to last, only just managed it, though both are clear of the cage.

THURSDAY (all matches are in R3)

CC-1 - (6) Kolya 73% v (9) the Sod 24% (3% Ivo)
CC-2 - (3) Nole 95% v (Q) Clement 0%-0 (4% Haas, 1% Floppy)
CC-3 - (8) Tsonga 56% v (11) Simon 33% (10% Ljubo, 1% Montanes)
C1-3 - (7) Verdasco 63% v (12) Cilic 36% (1% Kohli)
CC-4 - (15) le Monf 2% v Benneteau 0%-0 (98% Fed)
C1-4 - (4) Muzza 98% v (13) Stepanek 1% (1% PHM)
CC-5 - (2) Rafa 98% v (14) Robredo 0%-0 (2% Berdbrain)
CC-6 - (5) Potty 75% v (10) Gonzo 18% (4% isner, 2% Safin)

The most interesting matches could well be the one where you get two GEMs for the price of one and the one that sounds like a battle between two hot sauces!

QUOTES OF THE DAY

Among much slagging off of Clement on AM.com (until he won), much of it unrepeatable (but you know where to find it!) and amid much wailing and gnashing of teeth over being misled by false injury rumours, cazza99 (AM) was tempted to take drastic action: "I think I could wring the neck of that damn commentator who said Potty wasn't playing."

-David-- (AM) seemed intent on providing evidence of why he would end up down nearly 100 places on the day:

1.28 pm : "Clement's a whopper he won't win." Oops
4.47 pm : "Indoor hard courts ... the berdychinator is gonna win this in 2." Oops

Wolf (BT) has just realised that it's not the Paris Masters trophy that most players are trying to win this week, it's something far more important: "The loss of the tournament event is warming up well, after early contenders by Wawrinka (against wild card Guez), Kohli (only winning six games indoors against Seppi), Hanescu (losing to clay court specialist Montanes) Birdbrain has put in a case after being beaten by Rock On and now my winner pick Federer is in deep trouble against Benneteau."

Nevets (CC) clearly needs to make his predictions while he is asleep: "Funnily enough, I had a dream last night that Tenez was leading the CC leaderboard on BOTB and spookily enough, he is!"

WallaceEMann (GR) was as shocked as anyone over Fed's loss: "Gordon Bennet-eau!! I'd already slumped in the BotB. Now I'm done for!"

... but eblunt (BT) was even more put out and came out with my QOTD: "No I'm NOT happy. Why is it that misery always strikes from a totally unexpected quarter in this game. Well, not totally unpecpected, there's always a GEM involved. When they're not busy losing when then damn well should have won, they're winning when they should have lost. Basically all was fine for me then Fed goes out to a GEM after being a set up. I'm going to have to flounce off in a sulk now."

The Hoose · Satellite level

steven wrote:

eblunt wrote:

Steven,

Is there anyway to dilute the round 2 seeds effect in these types of tournaments with 48 players ? These very little motivation to pick anything else but all the seeds winning in round 2 , since your rd2 pick might come unstuck in round 1 ( e.g. Stan and Lopez). By sticking to rd2 seed winners you guarantee all winning picks standing for rd2.

How about if it was the winner of the match in rd1 that was deemed to be your pick in rd2 ? E.G. If you selected Stan, you would lose the point for rd1, but would still have Guez running in rd2 ?

As it stands, I'm guessing that all the '16 seeds to win rd2' players will be pretty close to the top by the time rd2 ends, almost making as though the real competition starts in rd3
It's possible, of course, and I understand what you're trying to achieve (indeed, in many ways it would be a fairer system), but it's quite a bit of hassle to set up for relatively little gain plus people tend to enjoy BOTB more the more players they have going deep into the draw, and encouraging people to make riskier picks in R2 by doing something like this would be liable to tend to reduce the amount of time they had an interest in the competition, if that makes any sense.

I share eblunt's sentiments here. I always pick all 16 seeds to make round 3 in these 4

layer draws (and, before you use my world ranking as proof that this may not always work, I know people in the top 3 who use the same approach).

But I agree with Steven that it's too much bother to change - there's enough scope for variation in the other rounds to still make these pickems exciting.

Of course, whatever we see in pickems happens in the real tennis world too. These tournaments are structured to get the seeds through to the final stages of the small masters tournaments, and that's a much bigger area of debate!

The Hoose · Satellite level

The Hoose wrote:

I share eblunt's sentiments here. I always pick all 16 seeds to make round 3 in these 4layer draws

Perhaps I should write 48 player draws without the hyphen in future!