AO Step ladder Final

[Twwety]

Firstly I would just like to Congratulate Brandon on his Win, it was a great effort.

My next question is, Does Anyone else disagree with the Step Ladder Final?

I just think that it's an unfair way to determine the Winner.

I watched Belmo bowl on the weekend & he qualified 10th after the 16 games Qlfy & then 1st after the Matchplay rounds. He bowled extremely well to get there.
Also so to did Matt Riley. From 16th to 2nd was a great effort.

But then for Matt to be beaten in the Final, & then Belmo to lose his 2 games, was really sad to see. Belmo worked hard to get there, only to lose to Brandon in the Final.

Someone did mention that the Final would be good only if it was televised. Which I would agree also.

I just want to know anyone else's opinon on this topic. And their reasons why the Step Final is good or why its not.

Jenny

 

[ilive2bowl]

We too would like to hear opinion on this as we have been approached by a large number of bowlers to introduce a stepladder into the Brunswick Cup....but from position 5.
Your comments would be appreciated.

 

[granat]

I believe the step ladder is a great format.
I agree with tweety that Belmo and Matt really did bowl well to get
there but when it was crunch time and Brando needed to win three games in a pressure cooker situation, he did it!
and the other two didn't.

A thoroughly well deserved victory.

I like the step ladder to be from 5th position

Graeme

 

[GeorgeF]

Step ladders were only ever introduced for TV as a specticle to showcase the sport and the best of the tournament. I personally feel step ladders a little unfair. Sometimes you cop some breaks and go from 3rd to 1st, or on the other hand you can lead a tournament by 400 pins and lose because of an unlucky break.

At the end of the day, the bowler who wins the tournament should be the bowler who has knocked down the most pins over the 2 or 3 days (thats why I dont agree with dropped pinfall)

You'll find step ladders overseas but only at tournaments that feature TV. Further to that, most aren't step ladders anyway, they are elimination formats where a final field of 8 go to a best of 3 or 5 game set to determin the winner. ie. 1 v 8, 2 v 7, 3 v 6, etc winners progress, losers are out.

Belmo bowled awesome and had his chance to win. Brandon on the other hand took his one and only opportunity with both hands and copped some good breaks when he needed them. Those are the breaks and at the end of the day it all evens up over time (except if your names Jason Belmonte and your bowling the AO).

What we need in Australia is some new formats involving multiple re-entries, smaller finals and seeding of the finalists for an elimination finish. Every other country in the world is doing this but in Australia we still feel the need to charge and arm and a leg and bowl these marathon formats. Under another post I'll post a format, just to give you an idea on what it's like overseas and why the new style formats are so much better.

Well done to Brando and Belmo, exceptional bowling by both.

G

 

[wchester]

My personal opinion of the stepladder is this...

For every stepladder bowler who moves up one or more spots, there must be an equal number of bowlers who drop down a spot in the final standings. While I can see the need for this type of playoff for televised events, I don't understand why it is used for non-televised tournaments.

Having lived here for almost five years, I'm still a little confused as to why there isn't a position round during the final match. With the present format in place, I find that quite often the final match is anti-climactic, as the top place getters are rarely matched up against one another. Let's add just one more game (positional) and see the pressure rise.

Last weekend the 20 finalists bowled 19 match games. Even without the game 20 position round matchups, surely that's enough games in which to assert one's dominance and prove you deserve to win the title.

Having to win it again in a stepladder rolloff is just plain dumb!