[Phil]

JanM, on Mar 29 2009, 11:57 AM, said:

xcurt, on Mar 28 2009, 11:02 PM, said:

A related question, when if ever will the ACBL allow the two teams who make the final of the Vanderbilt to "drop in" to the Open Swiss with, say, a carryover equal to 1/3 of the leader's carryover?

The same policy should apply to GNTs->LMs too.

The answer is never.

This is one of the walls I have stopped banging my head against

This has been discussed? In spite of HanP's sarcasm, I think it makes sense for the Spingold semifinalists to get a middle berth into the Swiss. Is there a similar event during the summer schedule too?

I don't see a correlation between the GNTs and the LM pairs however.

[JLOL]

Phil why not let the GNT finalists go into the lm pairs?

I think the biggest reason they do this is because no amount of carryover seems fair. This is why the world open pairs has no carryover at all (so rosenblum people can drop in).

[Phil]

JLOL, on Mar 29 2009, 01:28 PM, said:

Phil why not let the GNT finalists go into the lm pairs?

I think the biggest reason they do this is because no amount of carryover seems fair. This is why the world open pairs has no carryover at all (so rosenblum people can drop in).

You create a dilemma for a five bagger, but letting them in isn't really unreasonable I guess.

[xcurt]

JLOL, on Mar 29 2009, 01:28 PM, said:

Phil why not let the GNT finalists go into the lm pairs?

I think the biggest reason they do this is because no amount of carryover seems fair. This is why the world open pairs has no carryover at all (so rosenblum people can drop in).

I don't think this is the reason. After all, if that were the reason, offer a drop-in with zero carry-over. Without the drop-in, the nationals are over on Saturday night for the two Vanderbilt finalists.

I think the real reason is that the ACBL likes having multiple tiers of national events that officially carry a NABC+ rating, but have fields where the pairs that would normally get top seeds are off in some other event. And this situation is stable because the folks that run the ACBL, skill-wise, resemble the fields in those events much more than the fields in the "main" event.

[mycroft]

Well, that's true this time with this number of teams. What if the Vanderbilt goes through Sunday (as it tended to, at least in the Spingold, before the mini-S events came in)? What if they end Thursday (for some strange reason). What carryover do you give them in the IMP Pairs?

Strangely enough, I can see the reasoning behind this one. I could see it the other way, too.

[hanp]

Phil, on Mar 29 2009, 01:18 PM, said:

JanM, on Mar 29 2009, 11:57 AM, said:

xcurt, on Mar 28 2009, 11:02 PM, said:

A related question, when if ever will the ACBL allow the two teams who make the final of the Vanderbilt to "drop in" to the Open Swiss with, say, a carryover equal to 1/3 of the leader's carryover?

The same policy should apply to GNTs->LMs too.

The answer is never.

This is one of the walls I have stopped banging my head against

This has been discussed? In spite of HanP's sarcasm, I think it makes sense for the Spingold semifinalists to get a middle berth into the Swiss. Is there a similar event during the summer schedule too?

I don't see a correlation between the GNTs and the LM pairs however.

Exactly, the Spingold/Swiss idea makes perfect sense, the GNT/LM pairs idea does not, at least not to me.

[xcurt]

hanp, on Mar 30 2009, 11:21 AM, said:

Phil, on Mar 29 2009, 01:18 PM, said:

JanM, on Mar 29 2009, 11:57 AM, said:

xcurt, on Mar 28 2009, 11:02 PM, said:

A related question, when if ever will the ACBL allow the two teams who make the final of the Vanderbilt to "drop in" to the Open Swiss with, say, a carryover equal to 1/3 of the leader's carryover?

The same policy should apply to GNTs->LMs too.

The answer is never.

This is one of the walls I have stopped banging my head against

This has been discussed? In spite of HanP's sarcasm, I think it makes sense for the Spingold semifinalists to get a middle berth into the Swiss. Is there a similar event during the summer schedule too?

I don't see a correlation between the GNTs and the LM pairs however.

Exactly, the Spingold/Swiss idea makes perfect sense, the GNT/LM pairs idea does not, at least not to me.

At least in theory the GNT is a "major" event. In practice, not so much anymore since the USITT was changed to the new open format. I don't know how many ITT seeding points it carries now.

[JanM]

xcurt, on Mar 30 2009, 12:10 PM, said:

hanp, on Mar 30 2009, 11:21 AM, said:

Phil, on Mar 29 2009, 01:18 PM, said:

JanM, on Mar 29 2009, 11:57 AM, said:

xcurt, on Mar 28 2009, 11:02 PM, said:

A related question, when if ever will the ACBL allow the two teams who make the final of the Vanderbilt to "drop in" to the Open Swiss with, say, a carryover equal to 1/3 of the leader's carryover?

The same policy should apply to GNTs->LMs too.

The answer is never.

This is one of the walls I have stopped banging my head against

This has been discussed? In spite of HanP's sarcasm, I think it makes sense for the Spingold semifinalists to get a middle berth into the Swiss. Is there a similar event during the summer schedule too?

I don't see a correlation between the GNTs and the LM pairs however.

Exactly, the Spingold/Swiss idea makes perfect sense, the GNT/LM pairs idea does not, at least not to me.

At least in theory the GNT is a "major" event. In practice, not so much anymore since the USITT was changed to the new open format. I don't know how many ITT seeding points it carries now.

The GNT does not give PPs for the Open Trials. It does for the Women's Trials (but you have to have at least 4 women on the GNT team, and no one has earned any Women's PPs from the GNT to the best of my knowledge). Nor does the GNT give any Vanderbilt/Spingold seeding points (why not, she asks, to which I'm sure everyone says - because even you can finish second in the GNT).

As to whether dropping in has been discussed - yes, for years. Mainly GNT into LMP, but to some extent other events. It's a mindset issue - many ACBL Board members just don't think you should get to play in an event unless you started in it.

And in fairness (even though I think drop ins should be allowed), it would be difficult to determine where to draw the line. In the summer, there's a final weekend Swiss. If the Spingold ends on Sunday (as it usually does) what about the losing semi-finalists - shouldn't they be entitled to drop into the Swiss? It would be tough to argue that making the Spingold semi's isn't a lot harder than qualifying for the final day of the Swiss.