SCVA 16's

Re: SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (MB14DAD) — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 23:32:59 GMT

My two cents: All first seeds remain in Div. I, although I see pools 13, 15 and 16 being won by the second seed.

All seconds (with the exception of the previously mentioned pools) will start in Div. II except for pool two. I like HAX taking second there and Pool 6 where LB will finish 2nd..

Your two cents?

Re: SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (MB14DAD) — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 22:24:46 GMT

http://scvavolleyball.org/documents/16QDay3.pdf

Re: SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (22Dad) — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 01:40:52 GMT

Legacy over 900sqft 2-1
SoCal Elite beats Culver 2-1
900sqft over Culver 2-0
Legacy- 2 SoCal Elite- 0
Legacy- 2 Culver- 0

don't know what happened in last match of day between 900 & So Cal Elite...but, I would put my money on 900

Re: SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (MB14DAD) — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 01:26:06 GMT

Re: SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (VolleyDon) — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 13:00:46 GMT

If you look at the qualifier flowchart (which requires an electrical engineering degree to decipher) it looks like they can add "misseeded teams" from the lower divisions (e.g., bronze) to the upper bracket (gold) division for the 2nd qualifier. I assume they just add a pool or two.

So Vipertom is right, they will probably do this for Hax, allowing them to start the mandatories closer to where they belong.

Re: SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (vipertom) — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 11:18:08 GMT

HAX should have a very good chance of being in gold sooner than you think. In the 18's, the best 1st place finishers in the bronze were placed in the gold pools for the second day. Maybe they will use the same format for the 16's.

t.r.

Re: SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (CDBVB) — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 02:07:38 GMT

I was shocked when I saw where HAX was seeded on Saturday.
I was looking for them in the gold division, then searched the silver division ... and my heart sank when I saw them sitting in the Bronze division.
My opinion: They should have started in the gold division.
I'm sure that many parents agree with me.
Points % - 2.778 !! That's phenomenal!
I am not affiliated with this team, but I am familiar with many of the girls on the team.
Sure, it's nice...

Re: SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (hupp) — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:22:35 GMT

So where are they all going to qualify - saw that sunshine is headed to KC.......what others to which others....last year spokane was loaded with SC talent in 16's --- perhaps THE toughest qualifier in the 16Open age group........certainly all will play in the SC qualifier - but after that.....???

Re: SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (volleyball) — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 13:53:10 GMT

pool 13 and 14 need some fixing, results??? 5/1 and 5/1??? 25 vs 26 in match 3 ???.

Re: SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (22Dad) — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 12:52:55 GMT

if anybody from the SCVA visits this thread...THANK YOU VERY MUCH for posting all the results so FAST from this weekend's play.

Re: SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (MB14DAD) — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 00:02:27 GMT

All the results for qualifier #1 are already posted. For all age groups. Fasted I've ever seen from SCVA. Way to go!

Re: SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (lbc) — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:01:13 GMT

Barney wrote:

Barney wrote:
Strangest seed I see is Sinjin Smith's new club (HAX) being put in the bronze as the #142 overall seed.

Looking at their roster, it looks like a Low Division 1/High Division 2-type team. Given the way the qualifier flow chart works, even if this team wins every match in the qualifiers, the best they can start...

Re: SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (volleyball) — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 16:27:28 GMT

Barney, who gets bounced????????? Wont happen.

Re: SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (volleyball) — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 16:18:00 GMT

16G only unknown pool finishes: pools 3,4,11, and 14???? All others mentioned or finished 1-2 as seeded. Anyone know W/L and % points on these 4?
Anyone sure that point % will be used as tie-breaker for Q3 seeding?

Re: SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (Barney) — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 16:01:03 GMT

Barney wrote:
Strangest seed I see is Sinjin Smith's new club (HAX) being put in the bronze as the #142 overall seed.

Looking at their roster, it looks like a Low Division 1/High Division 2-type team. Given the way the qualifier flow chart works, even if this team wins every match in the qualifiers, the best they can start the season is in Division 5.

Sounds like poor communication between the...

Re: SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (SoCalVBFan) — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 15:00:56 GMT

Pool 1
1...Mizuno Long Beach 16 Mizuno
2...Kern River 16 Elite

Pool 7
1...Wave 16 Katie Spalding
2...Club Jamba 16 Parker

Pool 10
1...Coast 16 Jackie

Any more results???

Re: SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (Baller) — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 20:39:15 GMT

MB14DAD wrote:
Went three. 2nd game was 25-23 Surf City. Tiebreaker was close at 9 all I think, then TCA pulled away. Surf City will be in Div 1 this year, maybe the 1st mandatory, but for sure by the 2nd Mandatory.

Re: SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (MB14DAD) — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 20:06:13 GMT

Went three. 2nd game was 25-23 Surf City. Tiebreaker was close at 9 all I think, then TCA pulled away. Surf City will be in Div 1 this year, maybe the 1st mandatory, but for sure by the 2nd Mandatory.

Re: SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (vblovers) — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 19:58:44 GMT

Re: SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (MB14DAD) — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 23:55:54 GMT

TCA 16-1 - 3-0, 6-1
Surf City 16-1 - 2-1

Others -

Miz LB Mizuno - 3-0, 6-0
SMBC Trevor - 3-0, 6-1

SCVA 16's

feeds@yuku.com (MB14DAD) — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 23:02:52 GMT

Qualifier #1 Pools up.

http://scvavolleyball.org/documents/16QDay1_000.pdf