European (Tea)Cup - League F - Antwerp and Planckendael vs Stuttgart

[TeaLovingDave]

Two collections which each stand a chance to progress, although it is certain that if one progresses the other will not, and it is still possible that neither will do so - as such, there is everything to play for and everything to lose as we deal with the category of GRASSLAND AND DESERTS.

Enjoy!

 

[TeaLovingDave]

Not at all sure which way my thoughts will fall on this one, to be honest!

For now I will park my vote with Stuttgart at 3-2 level, as several of the species within the excellent Terra Australis house fall within the purview of this category, but I suspect that I could well switch my vote in any given direction if the arguments and points raised either strengthen my position, or change my mind entirely.

 

[twilighter]

My initial feeling is to give a lead to Belgium collections and I will follow it. The African zone at Plankandael is of very high quality and always have been delightful to visit. Kordofan Giraffe and Mhor Gazelle exhibit in particular, but also Grevy's Zebra, Gazelle exhibits, Spotted Hyena, Cheetah ext.

Asian Elephant facility is in the "Best of Europe " category. And the other Megafauna exhibits, like Bison/Wapiti and Indian Rhino/Muntjac are also very good.

Australian zone deserves mentioning here.

The Lion exhibit and Buffalo Aviary at Antwerp is probably the ones that stand out.

Wilhelma's Tera Australia is great, indeed, but the other parts of the zoo which are considered in this category feel a bit tired.

3:2

 

[CrashMegaraptor]

This might actually be the comeback the Belgian duo was looking for. I'm pretty sure there was a comment on a previous match-up saying they'd be good at this category. The fact that it's already won this category in the "heats" definitely helps.

 

[Paul.Haerle]

Wilhelma has also a nice Australia and a nice Africa aviary with:
Australian Aviary
Crested Pigeon (Ocyphaps lophotes),
Bush-thick Knee (Burhinus grallarius),
Masked Lapwing (Vanellus miles),
Galah (Eolophus roseicapilla),
Cockatiel (Nymphicus hollandicus),
Budgeriar (Melopsittacus undulatus),
Eastern Rosella (Platycerus eximius),
Red-rumped Parrot (Psephotus haematonotus),
Australian King Parrot (Alisterus scapularis),
Blue-faced Honeyeater (Entomyzon cyanotis)

African Aviary
Vulturine Guineafowl (Acryllium vulturinum) (?),
Yellow-necked Spurfowl (Pternistis leucoscepus)
Madagascar Teal (Anas bernieri)
Blue-billed Teal (Spatula hottentota),
African Comb Duck (Sarkidiornis melanotos)
White-faced Whistling Duck (Dendrocygna viduata)
Laughing Dove (Spilopelia senegalensis),
Rameron Pigeon (Columba arquatrix),
Hartlaub's Turaco (Tauraco hartlaubi)
Blacksmith Lapwing (Vanellus armatus),
Lilac-breasted Roller (Coracias caudatus)
Blue-beilled Roller (Coracias cyanogaster),
Black-winged Lovebird (Agapornis taranta),
Magpie Shrike (Lanius melanoleucus),
Violet-backed Starling (Cinnyricinclus leucogaster),
Superb Starling (Lamprotornis superbus),
Wattled Starling (Creatophora cinerea),
Chestnut-and-black Weaver (Ploceus castaneofuscus)
Village Weaver (Ploceus cucullatus)

The Small Mammal and Bird House houses Greater Roadrunner, Red-throated Bee-eater, Black-bellied Sandgrouse, Rock Pratincole, Long-toed Lapwing, African Pygmy Falcon, Sudan Golden Sparrow, Orange-breasted Waxbill, Purple Grenadier, Yellow-bellied Sunbird, Rock Cavy and Southern Three-banded Armadillo.

And, in the last greenhouse in the greenhouse row is a little Australia aviary which houses
King quail (Synoicus chinensis),
Diamond dove (Geopelia cuneata),
Scarlet-chested parrot (Neophema splendida),
Star finch (Bathilda ruficauda),
Diamond firetail (Stagonopleura guttata),
Gouldian finch (Chloebia gouldiae),
Double-barred finch (Stizoptera bichenovii),
Red-billed long-tailed finch (Poephila acuticauda hecki)
Australian zebra finch (Taeniopygia castanotis)

 

[remar]

Imo this is another very close match. My first feeling was a small advantage for Stuttgart.

Regarding the elephants i want to add that Planckedael is indeed fabulous. Therefore Antwerp is very weak (at least indoors). Stuttgart isn't great either, but they already decided to stop with the elephants at the current exhibit, after one of the two cows dies, while they acquired new animals at Antwerp very recently with no end in sight. The hoofstocks at Wilhelma also has an excellent stock list at good (but maybe not so eye-pleasing exhibits like at Planckendael). Birds and reptiles are great at both collections. Beside the already mentioned from @Paul.Haerle the aviaries at at the Damaszenerhalle also have some grassland birds.

It's another match where i wish i could chose something between 55 to 45 and still not sure where the 3:2 vote will go.

 

[Penshet]

while they acquired new animals at Antwerp very recently with no end in sight.

The plan is to stop with elephants in Antwerp as well, but the studbook very desperately needs space for adolescent bulls.
It is expected that the current ones are the last ones though.

 

[TeaLovingDave]

A much quieter match than I had hoped, with not all that much discussion either way, but a much-desired win for the Belgian pair:

Antwerp and Planckendael - 52/95 points - 54.737%
Stuttgart - 43/95 points - 45.263%
.

 

[Philipine eagle]

A much quieter match than I had hoped, with not all that much discussion either way, but a much-desired win for the Belgian pair:

Antwerp and Planckendael - 52/95 points - 54.737%
Stuttgart - 43/95 points - 45.263%
.

I can't figure this out



I lost my way for a moment, because I thought I fully understood how voting is done and how points are settled: e.g. 4-1 has a bigger impact than 3-2.
It never occured to me before, but in this match, with only 3-2 or 2-3 votes were cast, so how do you arrive at these final results? I re-read your introduction post but could not find any explanation on that.

 

[remar]

It's simple math For Antwerp/Plancendael just multiple the points given with the amount of votes 14*3+5*2=52
Stuttgart: 14*2+5*3=42

 

[TeaLovingDave]

I can't figure this out

View attachment 802578

I lost my way for a moment, because I thought I fully understood how voting is done and how points are settled: e.g. 4-1 has a bigger impact than 3-2.
It never occured to me before, but in this match, with only 3-2 or 2-3 votes were cast, so how do you arrive at these final results? I re-read your introduction post but could not find any explanation on that.

So, in this match a total of 19 people voted, with each vote worth a total of 5 points. This means that overall there were 95 points available (5x19=95) to be split between the two competitors.

The Belgian pair earned points as follows:

(3x14) + (2x5) = 42 + 10 = 52 points

Stuttgart earned points as follows:

(2x14) + (3x5) = 28 + 15 = 43 points

Percentage-wise, rounded up to three decimal places, these scores work out as 54.737% and 45.263% respectively

----

Incidentally, this provides me with a good excuse to explain once again why it is worthwhile for people to vote even if the result seems obvious and a foregone conclusion, in order to prevent any undue impact on the final score which a wildly-aberrant vote might have.

Imagine a match between collection X and collection Y ended up with very little participation due to how obvious the result was, with the score looking like the following in the final hours of the match:

X 3/2 Y = 10 votes

This would obviously produce a final point split of 30/20 or 60% to 40%

However, if a single person voted Y 4/1 X just before the match ended, the final point split would be 31/24 or 56.364% to 43.636% - a fairly significant shift in percentages overall, which could have a big impact on later progression.

Now imagine the same scenario, except more people were originally willing to vote despite the result being deemed obvious and as such the score looked as follows after the aberrant last-minute vote:

X 3/2 Y = 24 votes
Y 4/1 X = 1 vote

This would cause a final point split of X = 73 and Y = 52, with the resulting percentages being 58.400% and 41.600% respectively - with a much smaller impact from the aberrant vote.