On Friday 13th – lucky 13 –
I flew to Toronto for the 34th annual Johnny Goodguy tournament.
This event is organized with pleasant efficiency by Peter
Moulton, and 60 players showed up on April 14 to vie for
the title. By now everyone knows that Martin Labelle won
the tournament with a perfect 20-0-0 record, defeating a
very impressive Denis Bégin in the final. Martin
and Denis were both formidable that day, except that Martin
was also unbeatable. But that’s just one of three
tales I want to tell in this piece. The second noteworthy
story of the tournament, in my opinion, is the persistence
of Greg Scoma, who knocked off #3 seed Matt Walma in the
round of 16. The third story deals with a prediction by
Carlo Bossio concerning my own play, which rang true enough
in Brampton: I made a minor breakthrough in a major Canadian
event, finishing 8th after the preliminary round and 6th
overall after the playoffs.
Dave Kraehling, Martin Labelle, Denis
Begin
Before delving into details of Labelle’s
perfection, Scoma’s persistence, and Bossio’s
prediction, I want to commend everyone who organized and
participated in the 2007 Johnny Goodguy event. Peter and
his associates are experienced organizers; everything ran
smoothly. They accommodated 60 players in a fair and professional
fashion, and laid on a nice buffet supper to boot. Everyone
played all their games with a minimum of fuss and bother,
and a maximum of competitiveness and sportsmanship. The
event has its own distinctive style and flavor, which I
happen to favor very much. I was welcomed warmly by Peter,
by Johnny “Goodguy” Beedham himself, and by
old friends and new friends alike from the regional table
hockey community. Everyone was well-treated and well-fed
– and for those who like to bend an elbow, well-watered.
The organizers invited me to return next year, and I sincerely
hope to do so. Meanwhile, I salute them all for their dedication
to the Johnny GoodGuy tradition. It has longevity and character.
This tournament is distinctive in a few
different ways. Let me enumerate five. First, it attracts
an interesting mixture of recreational players – some
of whom play as little once per year, solely at this event
– and devout fanatics (present company included this
year), who play in as many leagues and tournaments as possible.
Second, since the JGG event has so much history, organizers
seed the players by drawing from their own deep well of
stats, and without looking at external events. This can
produce anomalies, when top players with no prior history
at Brampton waltz in unseeded and win it all, as did Dave
Kraehling in 2005 and Gino Bossio in 2006. I was unseeded
this year too, and managed to defeat three seeded players
before losing to one. So seeding means something, but not
everything. Third, the playoffs are best-of-three matches
until the finals, which are best-of-five. This puts extra
pressure on the players, because a shorter series always
gives weaker players their best odds against stronger ones.
In a longer series, such as best-of-seven, performance differentials
manifest more consistently, with stronger players much more
likely to prevail. But in a short series, a weaker player
can get hot and stay hot long enough to upset a stronger
one. Do the math: in a best-of-seven, you can afford to
lose two or even three games, and still win. In a best of
three, the margins are much tighter. One bad game, or even
one bad goal, can do you in. Fourth, both preliminary and
playoff rounds at Brampton are sequenced on just a few boards,
so everyone typically plays one game, then sits out (or
referees) a couple more, then plays again. So the tournament
has a different rhythm from the ten-game-back-to-back
rotations that are favored in many other venues. Personally,
I like some breathing space between games. Playing ten games
without a break poses one kind of challenge; playing them
with frequent breaks poses another. In consecutive play,
you have no chance to regroup between games; in intermittent
play, you have a chance to regroup, but you can also lose
your focus. Fifth, the total number of games played at Brampton
is fewer than in the Quebec tournaments, and so every game
– and every goal – matters that much more on
the day.
For all participants at Brampton, these
factors conspire to place additional importance on every
single game, as well as on every goal for and against, during
the preliminary round. One game, or even one goal, can shape
one’s entire path in the playoffs. After the preliminary
round, the top twelve players get a bye, while players ranked
thirteen through twenty play a wild card round for the last
four playoff spots. That determines the round of 16, in
which everyone is ranked according to their preliminary
standings. So #1 plays #16, #2 plays #15, and so forth –
in best-of-three series. The strategic thinking goes like
this: You want to finish among the top eight if possible,
to insure that you will face someone with a worse record
than you in the playoffs. (Since #8 plays #9, that differential
is the least significant.) Conversely, you want to avoid
ending up in a dogfight for the 16th playoff spot, where
your “reward” for winning that spot is facing
off against #1. But because of the internal seeding method,
which excludes players with no history at Brampton, a given
division can become lopsided, with three or four strong
players fighting for a top spot. Given 5 divisions of 12
players each, everyone plays 11 games, and it is clear from
the outset that you must go undefeated, or lose at most
one game, to be assured of a top-8 finish. This puts a lot
of pressure on every contender. Moreover, given that a handful
of top players will inevitably emerge with similar records,
goals for and against will become critical as tiebreakers.
Bearing all this in mind, here are the
standings after the preliminary round. Red highlights denote
seeded players; black, unseeded. (The PLYR number is just
an internal reference, and has no meaning in the rankings.)
As you can see, seven of the top twenty players were unseeded.
You can also see the importance of winning as many games
as possible, and of scoring as many goals as possible. Martin
Labelle, Denis Begin and Matt Walma went undefeated and
untied, taking the top three spots. Sean Beedham and Dave
Kraehling went 10-0-1, amazing records but only good enough
for 4th and 5th place. Daniel Bordeleau went 10-1-0, finishing
6th. Dany Leclerc placed 7th at 9-1-1, nosing me out on
goals for and against. I finished 8th at 9-1-1, similarly
nosing out John Beedham, who finished 9th. Michel Decarie
didn't lose a game, but his three ties dropped him into
10th spot. Only three points separated the top 10 finishers.
After the wild card skirmish for 12th–16th
places, the round of 16 went like this:
#1 Martin Labelle vs
#19 Bill Garret (3-1, 2-1)
#2 Denis Bégin vs #18 Pat Martin
(8-1, 10-4)
#3 Matt Walma vs #16 Greg Scoma (2-3ot,
4-5ot )
#4 Sean Beedham vs #13 Louie Piacentini
(5-1, 2-1ot)
#5 Dave Kraehling vs. #12 Vito Brundia
(3-1, 3-2ot)
#6 Daniel Bordeleau vs #11 Dave Hedley
(7-2, 0-1, 3-0)
#7 Dany Leclerc vs #10 Michel Décarie
(2-3, 4-3, 1-2ot)
#8 Lou Marinoff vs #9 John Beedham (3-2,
4-3)
The big upset was by #16 Greg Scoma, who
knocked off #3 Matt Walma in two straight overtime games.
More about Greg later. Michel beat Dany in a double overtime
thriller.
The quarter finals went this way:
#1 Martin Labelle vs #16 Greg Scoma (4-3,
5-1)
#2 Denis Bégin vs #10 Michel Décarie
(5-2, 1-2, 2-0)
#4 Sean Beedham vs #8 Lou Marinoff (3-1,
2-1)
#5 Dave Kraehling vs #6 Daniel Bordeleau
(5-1, 2-0)
The semi-finals featured two Quebec-Ontario
pairings:
#1 Martin Labelle
vs #5 Dave Kraehling (5-1, 6-5ot)
#2 Denis Bégin vs #4 Sean Beedham
(6-4, 4-3)
Martin prevailed over Denis in the all-Quebec
final:
#1 Labelle vs #2 Bégin (4-3ot, 2-0,
9-0)
Dave Kraehling defeated Sean Beedham 5-4
in the all-Ontario bronze medal game, in a dramatic comeback
from a 1-4 deficit.
Congratulations to the three top players on the day –
Martin, Denis, and Dave – all of whom turned in exemplary
performances against a very determined field. So much for
the numbers, which are a matter of public record. Now let’s
follow three not-so-public stories: Labelle’s perfection,
Scoma’s persistence, and Bossio’s prediction.
Perfection
I first met Martin Labelle
in August 2006, in his capacity as the man who saved the
classic #5380 Coleco board from extinction. I have come
to know him quite well since then, in his capacity as a
table hockey champion. He is an incredibly talented and
relentlessly driven player. His drive is toward perfection.
All perfectionists know that “the devil is in the
details,” and Martin pays meticulous attention to
every detail of his game. In a previous episode of my comeback
saga, I thanked Martin for the table hockey lessons he taught
me back in November. They are already bearing fruit. Martin
is not only a skilled craftsman and top player, but also
a consummate student and expert teacher of the game. He
and Denis drove to Brampton together, intent on the idea
that one of them might win the tournament. Finishing 1-2
as they did, it’s clear that they both won.
Martin’s performance was brilliant. Going 20-0-0 against
this field was nothing short of perfection. There is another
germane saying, namely “practice makes perfect.”
And I know how assiduously Martin practices. He and Denis
had invited me to practice with them on the Friday night
before the tourney. We went at it for about five hours,
breaking only for supper. Denis played very well on Friday,
sending signals that he would be tough to beat on Saturday.
And so he was. I warmed up with them on Saturday morning
too, and I recall one game in which Denis beat Martin 11-4.
You know that kind of game, where everything goes in from
everywhere. Even Martin is vulnerable to this syndrome;
sooner or later, it happens to everyone who plays. At one
point Denis started laughing, because everything he tried
worked, no matter what. For some reason, Martin was less
amused. Later the same day, in game #3 of the tournament
final, he beat Denis 9-0. That’s what we call “the
last laugh,” proverbially the best.
Labelle, Marinoff,
Begin
practice makes perfect
What’s the secret of
Martin’s perfection? No secret at all; the keys are
the same for everyone, and there are three: talent, practice,
mastery. Talent is a gift, and Martin has been blessed with
a great one. Practice is a matter of hard work, and one
must be willing to do it. Martin is more than willing. Mastery
means many things, because there are so many aspects of
the game to master. Mastery means developing one’s
talent to the fullest, by practicing and competing in the
right way. It means seeing what is taking place on the board,
and adjusting accordingly. It means understanding how to
perform as well as possible. It means learning from one’s
opponents, and from one’s mistakes. Mastering the
game really amounts to mastering yourself, by becoming the
very best player that you can be. That is the road toward
perfection, and Martin Labelle has gone a long way down
it. Further than anyone else in JGG 2007.
Martin
Labelle, at home with the trophy
Persistence
I first met Greg Scoma in
September 2006, a month after acquiring a board from Martin.
Greg is Vice President of the NYCTHA, and our league’s
chief statistician. He is also a persistent player, and
his persistence paid him a handsome dividend at Brampton.
Greg travels further than anyone to play in our league –
all the way from Virginia – and on top of that he
did not miss a single league date this year. He handed me
one of my three losses during our regular season league
play, and is a major threat in our upcoming playoffs. Moreover,
he has competed in Montreal, Las Vegas and Brampton this
season, showing an intense desire and a genuine capacity
to improve his game.
Greg practiced with Dave Kraehling the day before and the
morning of the Johnny Goodguy event, which definitely helped
him when it counted. Greg has clearly understood that the
best way to move up is to play up. We learn incomparably
more by losing to stronger players than we do by defeating
weaker ones.
So Greg’s persistence paid off big time in the round
of 16, where he faced #3 seed Matt Walma. I’m pretty
sure that nobody thought Greg would win, except maybe Greg.
But as I watched the early minutes of game #1, I saw that
Greg was playing with a lot of skill and composure. He shut
down Walma’s offence, and created genuine scoring
opportunities himself. He stayed in the game throughout
the game, which got him into overtime. He pounced on the
puck like a cat, and put it away when he had the chance.
He did exactly the same thing in game #2, to Matt’s
shock and disbelief.
Greg
Scoma
persistence pays off
With that stunning victory,
Greg vaulted himself from 16th into 8th spot overall. Not
only that, he had transitioned from C division in Montreal
in October 2006, to a top-8 finish in Brampton in April
2007.That’s a steep ascent in a short time. Greg then
faced Martin, and (like everyone else who faced Martin that
day) went down fighting. Greg’s persistence has really
boosted his performance. He is an inspiration, and a model,
for every player striving to improve.
Prediction
The morning after the Sherbrooke
tournament in November 2006, Martin Labelle gave me an unforgettable
table hockey lesson in his basement, teaching me the rudiments
of the “inside dimension” of offense. I reported
on that in episode #4 of The Comeback Trail, and a lot of
players (including Greg Scoma) have subsequently told me
how useful it has been for them as well. Toward the end
of that episode, I stated the following:
“So my next challenge is now plain:
I must develop the inside dimension of offense, and change
my defensive strategy from playing the puck to playing
the percentages. If I can do both these things successfully,
I will stand a good chance of cracking the top 10.”
In the intervening months since November
2006, I have taken steps in that direction. After reaching
the finals in Las Vegas in January 2007, and extending Dave
Kraehling to seven games, Carlo Bossio sent me an encouraging
email, in which he made the following prediction:
“You are more than on your way
to a top 8 and even higher showing in La Belle Province
tournaments.”
Carlo and Lou in
practice, January 2007
I realize that Brampton is not in La Belle
Province. Even so, it is a mainstream Canadian event. After
finishing 12th in Montreal and 14th in Sherbrooke, it is
refreshing (to say the least) to finish 6th at Brampton.
En route, I have taken Martin Labelle’s lessons very
much to heart.
In the preliminary round at Brampton, I
won my first eight games, defeating two seeds (Vito Brundia
and Jan Steinberg) along the way, and outscoring my opponents
45-5. But I lost focus in game nine, along with my offensive
touch, and was unable to capitalize on a wealth of scoring
opportunities against Ted Clapham (#37). He played well,
and I was fortunate to salvage a 1-1 tie against him. In
game ten, I faced a stronger opponent in Rob McKeown (#27).
Tied at zero, he scored an in-and-out goal. He also shut
down my outside game. So I reverted to the inside dimension,
and scored in the last minute to win 1-0. That lifted me
to 9-0-1, and set the stage for the division-deciding game
against none other than Denis Begin, who was 10-0-0. Denis
had been giving Martin and me fits in practice, and he continued
his winning ways, shutting me out 4-0. Up to that point,
I had allowed only 5 goals in 10 games. Even so, 9-1-1 was
good enough for 8th place. And I finished 5th overall defensively
in that round, even with my lapse against Denis. Defense
is crucial, especially when the offense sputters. I scored
only 2 goals in my last 3 games of that round, yet managed
a record of 1-1-1, thanks to die-hard defense and lady luck.
That set up my playoff match against John
Beedham, Mr. “Goodguy” himself. Before we started,
I remarked to him that I was glad to be playing somebody
my own age for a change. (We were among the oldest, if not
the oldest players in the tournament.) I recovered enough
offensive touch to win two close games: 3-2 and 4-3. My
reward for defeating Godfather Goodguy was facing off against
his son, who avenged his father by taking me out in two
close games, 3-1 and 2-1, both decided in the last minute.
That ended my day, but hopefully furthered my comeback.
Finishing 6th at a Canadian event provides a strong incentive.
Here are the final eight on the day.
1. Martin
Labelle (Quebec)
2. Denis Begin (Quebec)
3. Dave Kraehling (Ontario)
4. Sean Beedham (Ontario)
5. Daniel Bordeleau (Quebec)
6. Lou Marinoff (New York)
7. Michel Decarie (Quebec)
8. Greg Scoma (Virginia)
Privately, I managed another big step along
the way, having finally won a few games against Martin Labelle,
albeit in practice. Winning a few in April 2007 is definitely
a big improvement over losing them all in November 2006.
Martin’s insightful coaching has been effective where
it is most urgently needed: against Martin himself!
So I relish my Brampton 2007 experience: Johnny Goodguy
has been good to me. This season holds two more tests, both
of them big. The NYCTHA playoffs are on April 28; the Quebec
City tournament is on May 20. I’m the top seed in
the New York league, but Roger Owens, John Power and Greg
Scoma will be gunning for me. The NYCTHA is increasingly
a force to be respected, if not reckoned with. We placed
all four of our participating players among the final eight
in Las Vegas, and both of our participating players among
the final eight at Brampton. The NYCTHA is becoming a table
hockey factor.
Stay tuned for future episodes. The Big Apple and Quebec
City loom ahead, the final two destinations in my inaugural
season on the comeback trail.
Read
other episodes of "The Comeback Trail"
