I'm voting 2-1 for Zurich. I don't like voting 3-0 unless the losing zoo is really poor at the category.
I also feel that a 3-0 score should be an unusual occurrence, I even gave St Louis a point against San Diego originally.
I'm voting 2-1 for Zurich. I don't like voting 3-0 unless the losing zoo is really poor at the category.
I can see many contenders to Zurich - even though Masoala is an ace up its sleeve in multiple categories of this competition. If species counts are so important to you, how can anyone win against Moscow, Wroclaw, Plsen, or Berlin?If you do not give any credit to the number of species a zoo holds, then how can anyone win against Zurich?
If you consult Leipzig's website and discount the closed terrarium, there are currently 14 reptile species (versus 44 at Zurich) and 11 amphibian species (versus 15 at Zurich) on display, all in Gondwanaland. So your entire argument falls flat on its face.
I can see many contenders to Zurich - even though Masoala is an ace up its sleeve in multiple categories of this competition. If species counts are so important to you, how can anyone win against Moscow, Wroclaw, Plsen, or Berlin?
I think you're not giving yourself enough credit for arguing the case for Leipzig, because people clearly are taking into account Leipzig's (offshow) collection.people are [...] not taking into account Leipzig's superior collection
I do however think, this sets a problematic precedent. Though this precedent has unfortunately - and arguably much more problematically - already been set in the Berlin vs. Detroit match. If we fully count unconfirmable off-show (even if only temporarily) collections, why should we completely discount confirmed new developments, which are already set in stone, cement, glass, grass, bushes, and trees, such as Zurich's Lewa, Wuppertal's Aralandia (if they were in the competition), or Beauval's tropical dome?We are not discounting the closed terrarium because these species are part of the collection, they are just not on-show. They are still counted, I believe, if they are off-show.
I do however think, this sets a problematic precedent. Though this precedent has unfortunately - and arguably much more problematically - already been set in the Berlin vs. Detroit match. If we fully count unconfirmable off-show (even if only temporarily) collections, why should we completely discount confirmed new developments, which are already set in stone, cement, glass, grass, bushes, and trees, such as Zurich's Lewa, Wuppertal's Aralandia (if they were in the competition), or Beauval's tropical dome?