ＥＳＰＮより抜粋。 注目選手は、ダルビッシュ、岩隈、藤川。問題点は、リリーフ専門の投手が少ないこと。 1. Japan The defending World Baseball Classic champions is the only WBC team with active major leaguers on its roster that are not necessarily the best players on the team. That's not a slight against Ichiro Suzuki, Daisuke Matsuzaka or Akinori Iwamura, all of whom helped lead Japan to the inaugural WBC title in 2006. Rather, Nippon Professional Baseball offers the highest level of play outside of the US, and the Japanese WBC squad is an All-Star team taken from those ranks. This gives the Japanese team the luxury of batting the Rays' Iwamura and Cubs' Kosuke Fukudome toward the bottom of the order and benching Mariners catcher Kenji Johjima in favor of Yomiuri Giants slugging backstop Shinnosuke Abe. Japan has a deep, heavily left-handed lineup with equal parts speed and power, but what fuels the hopes of a repeat is Japan's pitching staff led by Matsuzaka and 22-year-old sensation Yu Darvish of the Hokkaido Nippon Ham Fighters. Right-handed starter Hisashi Iwakuma is coming off a dominant season for the Rakuten Golden Eagles (21-4, 1.87 ERA). Closer Kyuji Fujikawa, who didn't allow a run in the 2006 WBC, is coming off a four-year run of staggering dominance for the Hanshin Tigers (25-7, 1.12 ERA, 6.38 K/BB). If Japan's staff has a drawback, it's that all but three of its 12 pitchers are starters unaccustomed warming up quickly and coming in with men on base. Then again, given the pitch-limits being enforced (70 pitches in the first round, 85 in the second, 100 in the semi-finals and finals), Japan might just use two starters in tandem for their games in the first two rounds, reserving their three relievers in the highest-leverage situations.
日本は韓国に１４－２の７回コールド勝ちと、予想外の結果となった。
今回のダブルイリミネーションの方式は、前回の総当たり戦より改善されているが、まだ不満な点がある。それは、最後の１位と２位を決める試合だ。
日本が韓国に勝った時点で、２勝０敗の日本が１位であるべきで、再度、順位を決める試合を行う必要はない。
たまたま、ＥＳＰＮの電子版に、同じことが書いてあったので、全文を添付する。
WBC's new format better ... but it still leaves something to be desired
The inaugural World Baseball Classic in 2006 was a surprising success, proving that the lure of the game and the passion of international competition can outshine even a hastily cobbled together format and unsatisfying results. The 2006 WBC featured four four-team pools and a round-robin structure. Under those rules, each team played each of the three others from its pool once, after which a series of unsatisfying tie-breaker metrics were applied to decide which of the many 2-1 and 1-2 teams advanced.
That method eliminated 2-1 Canada after Round 1, despite the fact that it had defeated the advancing USA team (also 2-1) head-to-head. It then allowed Japan to advance out of Round 2 with a 1-2 record despite its having lost head-to-head to the USA, which was also 1-2 in Round 2 but did not advance. In the semifinals, Japan, who had gone 3-3 in the first two rounds, was able to eliminate 6-0 Korea in a single game despite the fact that it had lost two previous head-to-head matchups against the Koreans.
That was all quite unsatisfactory, so this year, the WBC has switched to a double-elimination format for the first two rounds. With that structure, the only stats that matter are wins and losses. Keeping the same four-by-four pool structure (with the nations in the three non-Asian pools shuffled slightly), the new rules eliminate any team that loses twice in a single round and rewards any team that wins twice in a single round with advancement. After the first two rounds, four teams will remain, and the tournament will return to simple single-elimination semifinals and finals as in 2006.
That's an improvement to be sure, but the new format is less than perfect. It's still possible for one team to defeat another twice in Round 1 and still have to face it again in Round 2. In fact, it's possible for two teams to play each other four times in the first two rounds, and a fifth time if they both make it to the finals (it is possible for two teams from the same pool to make the finals). The reason for this is that the sixth game in each of the first two rounds exists purely to determine the seeding for the next round. Both teams in that game will have already advanced, making it an oddly unsatisfying meeting between the two best teams in each pool. The sixth games in the second round will actually have two semifinalists face off with nothing at stake other than the identity of their semifinal opponent from the other pool.
In Round 1, it's actually quite likely that Games 3 and 6 will feature the same two teams, as Game 3 pits the winners of Games 1 and 2 against each other, and Game 6 features the two advancing teams. Given that, the sixth games in the first two rounds seem highly redundant and unnecessary, as it seems clear that the winner of Game 3, who will clinch advancement with a 2-0 record, should be the pool winner with the winner of Game 5, who will advance with a record of 2-1, the runner-up. Maybe they'll get it right in 2012.
Taking a closer look at the four pools, the split between the have and have-nots is pretty severe. The top two teams from each pool advance to Round 2, and it would be a major upset if any of the "second division" teams -- Chinese Taipei, China, South Africa, Australia, Canada, Italy, Panama, Netherlands -- were to advance at the expense of any of the "first division" teams -- Japan, Korea, Cuba, Mexico, USA, Venezuela, Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico. That will make the fifth games in each pool the most compelling of the first round as the loser of Game 3 (between the winners of Games 1 and 2) will face elimination against the winner of the Game 4 contest (between the losers of Games 1 and 2). In other words, if an upset were to happen, it would most likely happen in Game 5, which is the only game in each of the first two rounds in which the winner will advance while the loser is eliminated. With the weak half of the teams eliminated, the competition should really start to heat up in Round 2. It will take just nine days for the elite eight to yield a champion via the final at Dodger Stadium on March 23.
私がうまく説明できないことを、論理的に説明してあり、全く同感である。
１次ラウンドと２次ラウンドの第６試合（１位、２位決定戦）は不必要である。
今回の方式では、日本の場合、韓国と１次ラウンドで２試合、２次ラウンドで２試合、決勝で１試合と、計５試合戦う可能性がある。
１次ラウンドと２次ラウンドの第６試合がなければ、最大５試合が、３試合になる。
今回のダブルイリミネーションの方式は、前回の総当たり戦より改善されているが、まだ不満な点がある。それは、最後の１位と２位を決める試合だ。
日本が韓国に勝った時点で、２勝０敗の日本が１位であるべきで、再度、順位を決める試合を行う必要はない。
たまたま、ＥＳＰＮの電子版に、同じことが書いてあったので、全文を添付する。
WBC's new format better ... but it still leaves something to be desired
The inaugural World Baseball Classic in 2006 was a surprising success, proving that the lure of the game and the passion of international competition can outshine even a hastily cobbled together format and unsatisfying results. The 2006 WBC featured four four-team pools and a round-robin structure. Under those rules, each team played each of the three others from its pool once, after which a series of unsatisfying tie-breaker metrics were applied to decide which of the many 2-1 and 1-2 teams advanced.
That method eliminated 2-1 Canada after Round 1, despite the fact that it had defeated the advancing USA team (also 2-1) head-to-head. It then allowed Japan to advance out of Round 2 with a 1-2 record despite its having lost head-to-head to the USA, which was also 1-2 in Round 2 but did not advance. In the semifinals, Japan, who had gone 3-3 in the first two rounds, was able to eliminate 6-0 Korea in a single game despite the fact that it had lost two previous head-to-head matchups against the Koreans.
That was all quite unsatisfactory, so this year, the WBC has switched to a double-elimination format for the first two rounds. With that structure, the only stats that matter are wins and losses. Keeping the same four-by-four pool structure (with the nations in the three non-Asian pools shuffled slightly), the new rules eliminate any team that loses twice in a single round and rewards any team that wins twice in a single round with advancement. After the first two rounds, four teams will remain, and the tournament will return to simple single-elimination semifinals and finals as in 2006.
That's an improvement to be sure, but the new format is less than perfect. It's still possible for one team to defeat another twice in Round 1 and still have to face it again in Round 2. In fact, it's possible for two teams to play each other four times in the first two rounds, and a fifth time if they both make it to the finals (it is possible for two teams from the same pool to make the finals). The reason for this is that the sixth game in each of the first two rounds exists purely to determine the seeding for the next round. Both teams in that game will have already advanced, making it an oddly unsatisfying meeting between the two best teams in each pool. The sixth games in the second round will actually have two semifinalists face off with nothing at stake other than the identity of their semifinal opponent from the other pool.
In Round 1, it's actually quite likely that Games 3 and 6 will feature the same two teams, as Game 3 pits the winners of Games 1 and 2 against each other, and Game 6 features the two advancing teams. Given that, the sixth games in the first two rounds seem highly redundant and unnecessary, as it seems clear that the winner of Game 3, who will clinch advancement with a 2-0 record, should be the pool winner with the winner of Game 5, who will advance with a record of 2-1, the runner-up. Maybe they'll get it right in 2012.
Taking a closer look at the four pools, the split between the have and have-nots is pretty severe. The top two teams from each pool advance to Round 2, and it would be a major upset if any of the "second division" teams -- Chinese Taipei, China, South Africa, Australia, Canada, Italy, Panama, Netherlands -- were to advance at the expense of any of the "first division" teams -- Japan, Korea, Cuba, Mexico, USA, Venezuela, Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico. That will make the fifth games in each pool the most compelling of the first round as the loser of Game 3 (between the winners of Games 1 and 2) will face elimination against the winner of the Game 4 contest (between the losers of Games 1 and 2). In other words, if an upset were to happen, it would most likely happen in Game 5, which is the only game in each of the first two rounds in which the winner will advance while the loser is eliminated. With the weak half of the teams eliminated, the competition should really start to heat up in Round 2. It will take just nine days for the elite eight to yield a champion via the final at Dodger Stadium on March 23.
私がうまく説明できないことを、論理的に説明してあり、全く同感である。
１次ラウンドと２次ラウンドの第６試合（１位、２位決定戦）は不必要である。
今回の方式では、日本の場合、韓国と１次ラウンドで２試合、２次ラウンドで２試合、決勝で１試合と、計５試合戦う可能性がある。
１次ラウンドと２次ラウンドの第６試合がなければ、最大５試合が、３試合になる。