44 thoughts on “March 13, 2017: Don’t Tell Garfield”

    1. Heh. Just renewed it and was coming over to give the heads up.

      The link I can copy to invite people doesn't make sense, so I may need email addresses for anyone else who wants in.

      If you played last year, you were auto-invited via email.

  3. WBC Update:
    Pool C: CAN 0 - 8 USA. USA Advances, Canada eliminated.

    Pool D: MEX 11 - 8 VEN. Three-way tie! Puerto Rico beat all three teams, and MEX def. VEN def. ITA def. MEX.
    Here are the Rules:

    »» Three Teams Tied 1-2: If there are three teams tied 1-2, then the tiebreaker rules would be applied to rank the three, and the first two ranked teams would play a tiebreaker game, the winner of which would advance.

    The tiebreaker rules will be applied as follows:
    Step 1: The tied Teams shall be ranked in the standings for that Round according to fewest runs allowed divided by the number of innings (including partial innings) played in defense in the games in that Round between the Teams tied.
    Step 2: The tied Teams shall be ranked in the standings according to fewest earned runs allowed divided by the number of innings (including partial innings) played in defense in the games in that Round between the Teams tied.
    Step 3: The tied Teams shall be ranked in the standings according to highest batting average in games in that Round between the Teams tied.
    Step 4: Standings shall be determined by the drawing of lots, conducted by WBCI.

    Step 1: Mexico allowed 19R in 17 IP (Italy's walkoff run scored with 0 outs in the bottom of the 9th), Venezuela allowed 21R in 19 IP, Italy allowed 19R in 19 IP.
    Mexico eliminated.
    Tiebreaker today: VEN-ITA, Winner advances.

    Pool E: NED 12 - 2 ISR (8 innings: Mercy Rule)
    Israel's first loss. Gonna be hard for them to win a 3-way tiebreaker scenario considering they only scored 4 on Cuba.
    Tomorrow Morning: JAP-CUB
    Tomorrow Night: NED-CUB
    Wednesday Morning: ISR-JAP

    Pool F: Three of four teams decided.
    Tomorrow Night: DOM-PUR
    Wednesday Night: USA-[VEN/ITA Winner]

      1. I finally got to watch part of a game yesterday while I was at Burgers & Bottles. I absolutely love the joy of the Latino teams.

        I may be able to see a game tonight on ESPN Deportes.

        1. If you speak Spanish, Ozzie Guillen is one of the broadcasters. I have no idea if he's said anything Ozzie Guillen-y yet, though, since I don't speak Spanish.

          1. I don't speak Spanish, but I assume that won't change the fact that Ozzie Guillen is one of the broadcasters. I wonder if I still remember enough to get anything he'll be saying. I guess we'll find out.

            1. I still use that annoying joke whenever a waitress says, "Hey, if you need anything, my name is Emily." And most times I respond, "And what is your name if I don't need anything?" Most of them don't laugh.

      1. I don't know how else it could be calculated.
        Runs divided by IP.
        Partial innings would mean if one or two outs was recorded, which there was not.

        1. I think you can make a reasonable argument that if you took the field and the other team batted, that was a "partial inning", whether an out was recorded or not. Some people obviously interpreted it that way. I'm not really on either side, but it seems like that's something that should have been clarified before the tournament started.

          1. I see that side, Padre. You'll see on the chirons on TV that someone pitched "7+ Innings" if they faced people in the 7th and didn't get them out.

            But on the other hand, I don't think the "+" is officially recorded in the boxscores either, so statistically I think it might be a non-entity.

            1. In the boxscore, it's "Name pitched to X batters in the 9th inning" below the box.

              I think the language about partial innings meant that you didn't get full credit for an inning in which your team didn't record all three outs.
              That should make it slightly less likely there won't be a tie at that step. Going to step 2, earned runs brings scorer subjectivity into the equation.

  4. Have fun at the dance, Richie!

    If it’s not UNC or Kentucky, the obvious alternative to emerge from the South is No. 3 UCLA, but the various computer rankings are not as bullish on the Pac-12 as the conventional wisdom seems to be. The South also features perhaps the best bet for a 5-vs-12 upset: No. 12 Middle Tennessee, which knocked off Michigan State last year, has a roughly 50-50 shot of beating No. 5 Minnesota, according to our forecast.

      1. Yeah, they should come up with fun names for the brackets, perhaps with the #1 seed in them. Like, "Villanova's Victory Tour," or "How Will Kansas Choke This Time?"

        2. This is the NCAA remember. It will be a cash grab: Doritos Bracket, McDonalds Bracket, Target Bracket, Adidas Bracket.

    2. As someone pointed out the other day, 5 vs. 12 has almost been a toss-up in recent years, usually because the best mid-majors rarely go higher than 12 and there's very little difference in 5-8 seeds coming from major conferences. The Gophers shouldn't have any pressure on them because after last year just getting into the tourney made their season a success (making any tourney would have made their season a success) and losing Akeem Springs for the postseason will reduce expectations further.

        1. It's hard to feel too bad about it looking at that since the bets against Virginia (a much better team than Minnesota) and on UNC Wilmington (not as good a team as MTSU) are almost as lopsided. People just got to get their 5-12 upset.

Comments are closed.