NZ Super 8 tourney was as dodgy as they come

Post Reply
AntonS
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6406
Joined: 16 Sep 2003, 04:38

NZ Super 8 tourney was as dodgy as they come

Post by AntonS »

I've been asking why goal posts were moved after 4 eliminators, whereupon Nansen & Ritani-Coe should've contested semi-final 1 & winner would then contest winner of semi-final 2 = Meehan vs Sprott in Final. To date no-one in the mix is prepared to answer, but did send me the link to Tournament Format, which had been edited since then http://www.supereight.co.nz/
Last edited by AntonS on 14 Jun 2014, 22:01, edited 1 time in total.
tsmithy50
Cruiserweight
Posts: 601
Joined: 09 Sep 2010, 09:42

Re: NZ Super 8 tourney was doggy as they come

Post by tsmithy50 »

The judging was dodgy as they come.
bogan whisperer
Middleweight
Posts: 1668
Joined: 15 Aug 2013, 19:24

Re: NZ Super 8 tourney was doggy as they come

Post by bogan whisperer »

Does it really come as a great shock to people?
oliverfennell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5564
Joined: 15 Feb 2007, 06:37

Re: NZ Super 8 tourney was as dodgy as they come

Post by oliverfennell »

I enjoyed it. I disagreed with the Sprott-Rogan and Meehan-Sam decisions, but they were close fights and hardly rip-offs. As for the tournament format, I thought that while unconventional, it was made clear from the start.
AntonS
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6406
Joined: 16 Sep 2003, 04:38

Re: NZ Super 8 tourney was as dodgy as they come

Post by AntonS »

oliverfennell wrote:I enjoyed it. I disagreed with the Sprott-Rogan and Meehan-Sam decisions, but they were close fights and hardly rip-offs. As for the tournament format, I thought that while unconventional, it was made clear from the start.
Your're wrong there my friend. From the very start, winner of bout one was to contest winner of bout two in first semi final.....Did that happen? The format has since been edited to make it look like it was all Prim & Proper = Absolute honesty :lol: :lol: :lol:
oliverfennell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5564
Joined: 15 Feb 2007, 06:37

Re: NZ Super 8 tourney was as dodgy as they come

Post by oliverfennell »

AntonS wrote:
oliverfennell wrote:I enjoyed it. I disagreed with the Sprott-Rogan and Meehan-Sam decisions, but they were close fights and hardly rip-offs. As for the tournament format, I thought that while unconventional, it was made clear from the start.
Your're wrong there my friend. From the very start, winner of bout one was to contest winner of bout two in first semi final.....Did that happen? The format has since been edited to make it look like it was all Prim & Proper = Absolute honesty :lol: :lol: :lol:
That was the assumption, of course, but it wasn't announced that this would happen. The first time the format was mentioned, it was that QF1 winner would meet QF4 winner.
macaca
Super Middleweight
Posts: 1296
Joined: 25 Sep 2012, 07:49

Re: NZ Super 8 tourney was as dodgy as they come

Post by macaca »

Who gives a fornicate.
AntonS
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6406
Joined: 16 Sep 2003, 04:38

Re: NZ Super 8 tourney was as dodgy as they come

Post by AntonS »

oliverfennell wrote:
AntonS wrote:
oliverfennell wrote:I enjoyed it. I disagreed with the Sprott-Rogan and Meehan-Sam decisions, but they were close fights and hardly rip-offs. As for the tournament format, I thought that while unconventional, it was made clear from the start.
Your're wrong there my friend. From the very start, winner of bout one was to contest winner of bout two in first semi final.....Did that happen? The format has since been edited to make it look like it was all Prim & Proper = Absolute honesty :lol: :lol: :lol:
That was the assumption, of course, but it wasn't announced that this would happen. The first time the format was mentioned, it was that QF1 winner would meet QF4 winner.
Not so. I prepared the card in Boxerc according to format on this site http://www.supereight.co.nz/ (which had been edited since then) so it's in correct order, which also reflects in individual's record, unlike Prizefighter, where finalists last fight was quarter final. If you look at the card, you'll notice Semi 2 took place before Semi 1 http://boxrec.com/show_display.php?show_id=689232 I purposely did it that way as a reminder, there was last minute change to initial format.
AntonS
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6406
Joined: 16 Sep 2003, 04:38

Re: NZ Super 8 tourney was as dodgy as they come

Post by AntonS »

macaca wrote:Who gives a eff.
I do. Nansen or Ritani-Coe were denied the opportunity to challenge Sprott or Meehan in the Final
Other than ZERO, what was the purpose of so called official draw??
oliverfennell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5564
Joined: 15 Feb 2007, 06:37

Re: NZ Super 8 tourney was as dodgy as they come

Post by oliverfennell »

AntonS wrote:
macaca wrote:Who gives a eff.
I do. Nansen or Ritani-Coe were denied the opportunity to challenge Sprott or Meehan in the Final
Other than ZERO, what was the purpose of so called official draw??
But surely Nantsen was given a lucky break by this change, as it allowed him as the guy with the longest rest to face the guy with the shortest rest (Sprott) in the semis.
AntonS
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6406
Joined: 16 Sep 2003, 04:38

Re: NZ Super 8 tourney was as dodgy as they come

Post by AntonS »

What was the purpose of the draw, when the format/rules changed after quarter finals?
I wonder what would've happened if Mehaan & Sprott were eliminated in quarter finals.....particularly Mehaan ? ;;-)
Post Reply