Entrie for Guatemala

boxmel · Post by **boxmel** » 27 Apr 2008, 21:45

Take the 81kg in Guatemala - the top half has four fighters and the bottom half has eight. It would seem far more logical to have six on each side (and three in each quarter),

The draw rules state that with 12 boxers in a bracket, you have 4 bouts and 4 byes. Messing around with any other arrangement would be a mess. You can do all the byes at the top or at the bottom but there will still be 4 byes.

emile · Post by **emile** » 27 Apr 2008, 21:54

boxmel wrote:
Take the 81kg in Guatemala - the top half has four fighters and the bottom half has eight. It would seem far more logical to have six on each side (and three in each quarter),
The draw rules state that with 12 boxers in a bracket, you have 4 bouts and 4 byes. Messing around with any other arrangement would be a mess. You can do all the byes at the top or at the bottom but there will still be 4 byes.

I'm not sure I follow you Mel. I would do it like this:

Boxer1
BYE

Boxer2
Boxer3

Boxer4
BYE

Boxer5
Boxer6

Boxer 7
BYE

Boxer8
Boxer9

Boxer10
BYE

Boxer11
Boxer12

Four bouts and four byes. Perhaps the reasoning is that it would create a competitive disadvantage to have a fighter with a bye against a fighter without (although it still happens all the time). But I think it's much more unfair to overload the byes into one quarter of the bracket.

locoxelbox · Post by **locoxelbox** » 27 Apr 2008, 22:01

I get your point and you ar right. Like it is now at the Olympics with 28 boxers at each weight up to 81 kg, the four boxers that get a bye fight for one medal. If the byes were split that wouldn't happen. Anyway I think it's like Mel said, it could be a mess. This way it's easier when making the draw. And everybody knows how it is and there is no space for conflicts.

lap · Post by **lap** » 27 Apr 2008, 22:26

locoxelbox wrote:
lap wrote:Maybe boxing would benefit form a seeding system. Nothing complex like in tennis. But let's seed 2 or 4 guys depending on the size of the field
That wouldn't prevent the Alvarez-De La Cruz bout to take place early. The cuban had no international merits so why should he be seeded, because he's cuban? There are three qualifiers so the ones who don't qualify can't complain on the draw.
I've heard on many olympic fights where the commentators complain saying -This bout should have been the final and we aren't even in the medal rounds! Then it turns out that the winning boxer don't even reach the medals himself.

No, I am not talikg about the Cuban specifically. I'm talking about the four top fighters in a tournament ending up in the same quarter of a draw, especially when top 3 get to move on. I stand by my assertion that it makes sense, even for boxing.

boxmel · Post by **boxmel** » 27 Apr 2008, 22:32

It's my guess that it's done that way because the proper number of byes have to be drawn in the first preliminary round to reduce the number of boxers to two (final); four (semifinal); 8 (quarterfinal), and so on. This makes scheduling a tournament much easier and smoother and ensures that no one has a "rest" advantage over anyone else.

locoxelbox · Post by **locoxelbox** » 27 Apr 2008, 23:02

Sunday's action:

Surprisingly 2007 Pan Am champion Pedro Lima is out after losing to Bahama's Taureano Johnson.

57 kg
Roberto Navarro (DOM) a Bradley Henderson (BAR) 22-8
Robson Conceicao (BRA) a Arash Usmanee (CAN) 21-7
Giovanny Pantaleón (GUA) a Pablo Figuls (CRC) 16-6
Abner Cotto (PUR) a Miguel Marriaga (COL) 19-18

69 kg
Gilber Lenin Castillo (DOM) a Walter Castillo (NCA) 13-2
Alex Terán (COL) a Gilber Víctor Castillo (ECU) 17-10
Taureano Jhonson (BAH) a Pedro Lima (BRA) 10-6
Omar Moreno (VEN) a Oscar Molina (MEX) 9-8

75 kg
Clarence Joseph (ISV) a Dimas Yaret (HON) RSCH-1
Ezequiel Maderna (ARG) a Doel Rivera (PUR) RSCO-3
Yamaguchi Florentino Falcao (BRA) a Francy Ntetu (CAN) 18-6
Shawn Estrada (USA) a Alexander Brand (COL) 13-2

81 kg
Ventura Vasquez (MEX) a Melanio Flores (PAN) 9-8
Julius Jackson (ISV) a Jonathan Dávila (NCA) 14-3
Azea Austinama (HAI) a Steve Franjic (CAN) 15-5
Eleider Alvarez (COL) a Julio Castillo (ECU) 4-0

91 kg
Lois Jacques Sylveira (CAN) a Anderson Emmanuel Fitzgerald (BAR) RSC-3
Halmilton Ventura (BRA) a Javier Torres (MEX) RSCO-3
Deivi Julio (COL) a Alcívar Ayovi (ECU) 14-8
Alexander Vellón (PUR) a Jonathan Nedd (ARU) 6-5

jtyson · Post by **jtyson** » 27 Apr 2008, 23:57

anything from the second session?

emile · Post by **emile** » 28 Apr 2008, 00:32

I don't think it's any more complicated or controversial to do the byes this way. Clearly, in the Olympic draw, the odds of winning a medal from the top quarter are dramatically better, both because you have one fewer fight and a better chance of having a bracket entirely of fighters from less-accomplished countries. The result is so dramatic, that I assume it is done on purpose, because it prevents the same countries from sweeping all the medals.

I had considered the idea that this was to prevent a competitive disadvantage of a boxer having to fight in round one and then fight a fresh boxer in round two - but this does happen anyway in tournaments when the number of entrants is not divisible by four. I would guess that if you asked the boxers what they prefer, they'd choose the best chance to not be in a group of death.

Thanks for posting the results loco. Looks like a lot of surprises to me. The Virgin Islands might be headed for one or two more places, which would be something.

locoxelbox · Post by **locoxelbox** » 28 Apr 2008, 06:16

Sunday's second session is now up at http://www.aiba.org

boxmel · Post by **boxmel** » 28 Apr 2008, 09:14

this does happen anyway in tournaments when the number of entrants is not divisible by four.

What tournaments are NOT drawn per AIBA rules? I don't know of any.

emile · Post by **emile** » 28 Apr 2008, 09:42

boxmel wrote:
this does happen anyway in tournaments when the number of entrants is not divisible by four.
What tournaments are NOT drawn per AIBA rules? I don't know of any.

What I'm saying there Mel is that in an AIBA tournament with an odd number of fighters, you end up with the inequality I mentioned. Here's a random draw from the first European qualifier:
http://www.aiba.org/documents/site1/Oly ... 2057kg.pdf

Djelkhir got a first-round bye and got to face the winner of Di Savino/Pkhakadze in the next round. If Di Savino had won he would have had to continue to fight guys with one fewer fight all the way through to the semis.

In that draw, there were 21 fighters, so the byes were set from the top down until there were 32 lines filled. So, there was one quarter with 8, one with 5, and two with 4 - making the bottom draw much more likely to be a draw of death. It would be no more difficult to set the byes so that the quarters were 5,5,5,6.

I don't know how every other boxing tournament works, but in other sports byes are usually awarded by seeding, which is obviously not a factor here. It's extremely clear that the current system creates inequities - the remaining question is whether or not it matters, since all fighters have an equal chance of getting a bad draw.

jtyson · Post by **jtyson** » 28 Apr 2008, 11:18

thank god Hunter won. I was nervous about his draw but he prevailed. Now hes got Payares and hes qualifed. When 3 of the top 4 are all on the top part of the bracket it sucks that 2 of them will be eliminated while Rivas has no challenge on the bottem

boxmel · Post by **boxmel** » 28 Apr 2008, 12:00

the remaining question is whether or not it matters, since all fighters have an equal chance of getting a bad draw

.

Yep - that's what the random draw does. :( I think seeding in any of the qualifiers would produce one huge controversial mess. How in the world would you ever determine the top four in any weight class?

lap · Post by **lap** » 28 Apr 2008, 12:07

boxmel wrote:
the remaining question is whether or not it matters, since all fighters have an equal chance of getting a bad draw
.

Yep - that's what the random draw does. :(

Yes, but it goes back to my point of the draw having often more importance that what happens in the ring.

.I think seeding in any of the qualifiers would produce one huge controversial mess. How in the world would you ever determine the top four in any weight class?

Every sport in the world does it. Why not boxing?

lap · Post by **lap** » 28 Apr 2008, 12:07

And it's official. Canada's olympic cycle is an utter catastrophe.

boxmel · Post by **boxmel** » 28 Apr 2008, 12:57

Every sport in the world does it. Why not boxing?

Does every sport have 300+ athletes and 11 divisions? AIBA does't even do rankings any more so what method would you use to seed? How would you determine the top 4 in each weight class? Trust me - in boxing a random draw is the only way to not cause problems - you can't accuse anyone of favoritism; you can just hope you get a good bracket.

jtyson · Post by **jtyson** » 28 Apr 2008, 13:01

boxmel wrote:
Every sport in the world does it. Why not boxing?
Does every sport have 300+ athletes and 11 divisions? AIBA does't even do rankings any more so what method would you use to seed? How would you determine the top 4 in each weight class? Trust me - in boxing a random draw is the only way to not cause problems - you can't accuse anyone of favoritism; you can just hope you get a good bracket.

wrestling has 10 weight classes, and two categories which would be 20 weight classes. basically the same amount of competitors as boxing in each weight if not more and they seed

emile · Post by **emile** » 28 Apr 2008, 13:33

I can't find anything that says that Olympic wrestling is seeded. Anyway, it has been done in boxing, as in the US Championships, but that showed some limitations of a seeding system.

There are only a few truly meaningful boxing tournaments, so it's difficult to decide what to base it on. And since the US, for example, tends to go through boxers quickly, they would often be unseeded and get potentially worse draws.

There is nothing unfair about what happened to Downs, De La Cruz, and Castillo. It is possible that you can get several bad draws in a row, but there were three chances to qualify. De La Cruz lost to Downs and Alvarez, and Downs lost to Jeffries and Silva. Castillo lost to Egan and De La Cruz. There's nothing to suggest that any of them would be medalists in Beijing. It's harsh, but not unfair.

The talented Hungarian flyweight Pal Bedak really got crushed by bad draws in Chicago and Italy. In Chicago he was drawn in a quarter with Zou, Ayrapetyan, Zhakypov, Serdamba and in Italy drew Ayrapetyan again. But he persisted and won the final qualifier.

lap · Post by **lap** » 28 Apr 2008, 13:35

boxmel · Post by **boxmel** » 28 Apr 2008, 14:08

Anyway, it has been done in boxing, as in the US Championships, but that showed some limitations of a seeding system.

Yes, the top 4 in every weight class are seeded into the preliminaries so they have to box right off the bat - 2 in the upper bracket and 2 in the lower.

jtyson · Post by **jtyson** » 28 Apr 2008, 14:10

emile wrote:I can't find anything that says that Olympic wrestling is seeded.

Click on any weight class and the top 20 are seeded, then placed into 1 of 7 pools (A-G) based on their seed

boxmel · Post by **boxmel** » 28 Apr 2008, 14:13

Click on any weight class and the top 20 are seeded, then placed into 1 of 7 pools (A-G) based on their seed

They do the "pool" system in the Olympics?

jtyson · Post by **jtyson** » 28 Apr 2008, 14:21

boxmel wrote:
Click on any weight class and the top 20 are seeded, then placed into 1 of 7 pools (A-G) based on their seed

They do the "pool" system in the Olympics?

yep, whats wrong with a pool system? im not sugesting it as an idea for boxing but why do u think its ineffective?

lap · Post by **lap** » 28 Apr 2008, 14:35

From my point of view, the main argument against seeding is that it would cause constant controversy, because a huge part of well-intentioned boxing people have developed a considerable distrust of the higher-ups in charge of boxing, probably with good reason.

But that speaks to the fact that boxing has to clean its house up, not to the impracticability of a seeding system.

emile · Post by **emile** » 28 Apr 2008, 14:49

Well, you can make a totally objective seeding system pretty easily. Give Olympic seeds to the top four from the World Championships and each continental champion, for example. But that stuff can start to be self-selecting (getting better draws allows the same boxers to keep winning and getting seeded again), and it doesn't necessarily get the best fighters apart in the draw.

Perhaps it's less controversial in wrestling, because they can wrestle multiple times a day and have enough matches to better sort out the best.