Deluxe Ski Jump Forum

Would'nt it be great to have the lucky looser mode in DSJ???

I think it would be very funny to have lucky looser competitions.

hmmm, maybe it's an interesting idea....

I don't know. That knockout-system (or whatever it is called in english) is not very fair. It's not always the 30 best who gets to the 2nd.

Grufugl wrote:I don't know. That knockout-system (or whatever it is called in english) is not very fair. It's not always the 30 best who gets to the 2nd.

And how is that not fair?

Thomas wrote:

Grufugl wrote:I don't know. That knockout-system (or whatever it is called in english) is not very fair. It's not always the 30 best who gets to the 2nd.

And how is that not fair?

Just like I said: It's not allways the 30 best (best = most points) after the 1st round that makes it to the final.

Theoretically you can be looser # 6 (only 5 loosers gets to join final), and still be as good as # 12 in points after the 1st round - and you don't get to join the final.

I think the knockout system is fair. It gives the "poor" jumpers a possibility to get world cup points if they make a good first jump. And "the best" jumpers should, if they're knocked out, be able to become a lucky loser. If not, they're not the best........

Grufugl wrote:I don't know. That knockout-system (or whatever it is called in english) is not very fair. It's not always the 30 best who gets to the 2nd.

What do you exactly mean? tthe 30 best jumper, the 30 best jumper in that season or the jumpers with the 30 best jumps in that particular qualifying round? None of these is guaranteed anyways - especially the last one with the pre-qualifiers... they get through even when they jump the crappiest of the whole pool...

And, anyways, ski jumping, with its subjection to the changing wind has never been a "fair game" - see Rok Benkovic's World Champion title...

bioLarzen wrote:What do you exactly mean? tthe 30 best jumper, the 30 best jumper in that season or the jumpers with the 30 best jumps in that particular qualifying round? None of these is guaranteed anyways - especially the last one with the pre-qualifiers... they get through even when they jump the crappiest of the whole pool...

And, anyways, ski jumping, with its subjection to the changing wind has never been a "fair game" - see Rok Benkovic's World Champion title...

As I said in my last post in this thread: I mean the 30 best ("best" meaning having most points) after the 1st round. (Not the qualification round). It is in the 1st round this knockout/lucky looser system is applied, isn't it?

As I also said: You can, at least theoretically, be looser #6, and still be #12 in points after the 1st round - and not get to the final. Of course skijumping has never been a fair game in the sense that everyone gets the same conditions. But how can that be an argument for introducing rules that brings about more unfairness?

Grufugl wrote:

bioLarzen wrote:What do you exactly mean? tthe 30 best jumper, the 30 best jumper in that season or the jumpers with the 30 best jumps in that particular qualifying round? None of these is guaranteed anyways - especially the last one with the pre-qualifiers... they get through even when they jump the crappiest of the whole pool...

And, anyways, ski jumping, with its subjection to the changing wind has never been a "fair game" - see Rok Benkovic's World Champion title...

As I said in my last post in this thread: I mean the 30 best ("best" meaning having most points) after the 1st round. (Not the qualification round). It is in the 1st round this knockout/lucky looser system is applied, isn't it?

As I also said: You can, at least theoretically, be looser #6, and still be #12 in points after the 1st round - and not get to the final. Of course skijumping has never been a fair game in the sense that everyone gets the same conditions. But how can that be an argument for introducing rules that brings about more unfairness?

OK, I got it. Sure, you're right - it's not fair. But, i guess, that's why this knockout system is only applied for the Four Hills competition. There it's a tradition (since when do they have this knockout system for the Four Hills, anyways?), right?

But what you're saying is right.

bioLarzen wrote:OK, I got it. Sure, you're right - it's not fair. But, i guess, that's why this knockout system is only applied for the Four Hills competition. There it's a tradition (since when do they have this knockout system for the Four Hills, anyways?), right?

But what you're saying is right.

Good thing we agree
I can't remember exactly when this rule was introduced to the Four Hills Competition. Can anyone fill me in? I believe it may have been in the early 90's? Anyway, it's not a very long tradition, and it has allways been in dispute. The main reason given for it was that it would add extra exitement to the experience of the spectators, as I remember it. (Probably hoping for more TV viewers and more sponsor income I guess). When asked for their opinion in interviews, the jumpers themselves usually gives sort of diplomatic answers. But I believe the rule is not popular among them.

Grufugl wrote:When asked for their opinion in interviews, the jumpers themselves usually gives sort of diplomatic answers. But I believe the rule is not popular among them.

No wonder, I guess

As for it's introduction, I found this:

"Unlike at the other ski jumping events where the best 30 competitors of the first series qualify into the second series, all four tournament's events follow the so called knock-out system, first introduced in the 1996/97 season."

(from here: http://forum.snowvalley.ws/index.php?ac ... =39&t=1080 )

why only first if we want ko system then anyway it and 7 lucky luser at 50 not 5...
so 50->32->16->8->4->2->1
and why k.o system is int qualifation ?

and game like dsj3 we dont want it?

I don't understand the above message at all, sorry...

If there's no such a competition like Four Hills Tournament, then why bother with K.O. system really?

well, i "talk" a CUP not FOUR HILL TOURNAMENT...