BuzzerBeater Forums

I hope you are ?

We got a candidate! Yay!

Question from Thelonious

I also achieved getting the dutch team from 28th placed world ranking to place 12 for a while.

2 questions:
What place was the team ranked when you left?

And hypothetically speaking, if you had to play against Holland U21 as the manager of Belgium U21 in the U21 World Championship finals, who would you want to win?

1. Unfortunately I can't look it up, but it was between place 23 and 27. Considering the size (in users) of the country I was playing with that was pretty good.

2. Belgium, I just have to do my job well, besides I just can't stand losing.

It might not seem a lot of an improvement. And you're right it isn't. But for a country which is relatively small, you cannot expect a NT, to stay on a toplevel for a long period. This is mainly because NT's rely on a long term much more on the size of a country. But fact is that considering the size of the country, the normal place would have been around place 40. And I started at 28, because my predecessor was a good coach too. Ranking went never beyond the start ranking in my 3 terms.

I also hope the Belgium ranking will increase quicker. And I'm not gonna say what that will be, before knowing what players Belgium has, what strength or weaknesses the team has. But I do wanna state, that I want to go up on the ranking with the Belgium U21. Preferably more than less.



Last edited by Arsjitekt at 11/3/2011 7:59:12 AM

winning spots on the world ranking is very hard.

As for GM-Arsjitekt:

Netherlands NT was on the 22 spot when you left (was one spot higher than Belgium at that time ;)

Futhermore, to answer to Thelonious:

A team that doesn't make the European championship, often ends up on the world rankings at position 35 or lower, regardless the position it started. Belgium started this season as 23 ranked team world wide. We have now fallen to the 42nd spot, and we'll most likely still lose a few spots unless we get far in the consolation tournament. You get alot of points for the primairy competitive games, regardless if you win or lose ( win gives you some more ofcourse). So a team ranked 50th, that makes the european championship, will win alot of spots, even tho it loses all it's games...

In Europe, most teams have got 7 competitive games in their first NT season, and another 8, maybe 9 in consolation tourney, that doesn't give as many points as the repechage pool or the World cup games...

In america, Asia, and other countries, they've got many more competitive games. Why do you think that between rank 30 and 60 of the NT ranking, that their are nearly only European teams?

Nigeria and Misr ( Egypt) always are in the top 30. why? because they always get to take part in the world championship as representatives of Africa. However, Most of the european teams ranked between 30 and 50 can beat those 2 teams on neutral ground with their NT's...

So world ranking isn't that important. It's Continent ranking that really counts. And if you look at the Netherlands, then they've done a very good job under GM-Arsjitekt. Under GM-Arsjitekt, the Netherlands have been in the top 10 european nations all the time. Considering that Spain, Poland, Italy and France are near unbeatable, due to their large ammount of talent that they have at their disposal, i'd say that is a very good job.

GM-Arjitekts achievements with the dtuch NT can be put on par with JoE Mavericks achievements with the Belgian NT in season 9.

As for Arsjitekt:

what do you prefer most for the bigs: C with JS 3 and IS 16 or a C with JS 9 and a IS of 14 and please do explain why (i'm talking about a inside orientated attack, and you can assume that all other skills are the same)

That’s a nice question, in which the answer isn’t that simple than I rather have this one than that one.
It all depends on quite a few factors
1. The skills or the expected skillset expected direct opponent (the player he is playing against)
2. The skillset of the player in question
3. The inside attack played, Look Inside or Low Post
4. The skillset of the other players in the team
5. The defence you expect your opponent to play
6. The average skill of the team which you’re playing against
7. The strength and weaknesses of the own team.
Unfortunately there isn’t just one answer to your question. The player with JS = 9 + IS = 14 will be referred to as player 1, The JS = 3 + IS = 16 will referred to as player 2
I can write out all of these scenario’s, but I’m probably able to write about 10 pages about this question. So I’ll try to summarize it, for the most common situations.
Player one is more often suitable against opponents whom you have to profit from your sideskills, and when you know you’re headskills aren’t good enough. That almost always means playing a Low Post, since you make use of this more with this tactic, and when they got rebounding, you like to wait your players only to take the best shots. Player two is probably better if you’re team is good in ball circulation (handling, passing), and you are probably about equal in headskills with your opponent, or a bit better. Player one would again be better if the opponent is a lot worse so you can use both strengths.