King, could you please explain this line from today's excellent and entertaining column: "[Team USA] will be eliminated from the World Baseball Classic Wednesday night if Japan beats Korea and either gives up fewer than seven runs or scores more than seven."

if Japan wins one of those two occurrences must occur, if they win 7-6 they will have given up fewer than 7, if they win 8-7 they will have scored more than 7. i think the correct statement is that the US is out if Japan wins and scores no more than 7, if they score more than 7, then the US and Japan would advance in a 3-way tie. It's assinine but it is better for Korea to lose 7-0 than to lose 9-7.

My understanding of the tie-breaker rules based on what is posted on ESPN.com is that the first tie-breaker in a 3-way tie such as could exist between the USA, Korea and Japan is runs allowed in games between the tied teams. if Japan wins tonite say 9-7, then Korea will have allowed 12 runs in its 2 games, while the US would only have allowed 10 and therefore, it would advance along with Japan, which would have allowed 11. these tiebreaking rules are the most irrational I have ever seen.

If Japan wins 7-6 that would mean that all three teams would have allowed 10 runs, thereby triggering the next tiebreaker which appears to be earned runs allowed in games between the tied teams, followed by batting average in those games. What total moron thought that treating earned runs and unearned runs differently was a good idea.

The runs allowed rule also provides for the possibility that Korea and Japan could collude to fix tonite's game so that they both advance. The mere possibility that this could occur creates a huge appearance problem. I recall similar things being alleged in the past, most notably a 1982 World cup game between Austria and Germany. Although I hate for baseball to ever be mentioned in the same breath as soccer, this possibility could have been avoided by using the only sane tiebreaker of run differential in all three games in the round.

Lastly, I really like this tournament which has been more exciting than I thought it would be, but why aren't all the games on TV at normal times. For example tonite's critical matchups are not on at all except for "deportes". Is it possible that ESPN will get higher ratings for tennis or whatever than for these games on a Wednesday nite with not much else on.

Seton Hall, Syracuse and Marquette were the leagues three weakest teams in the tourney. Watch the league go 5-0 today.

the result is simply not legitimate. The tie-breaker system, which was critical to japan's advancing to the semi-finals had about as much to do with baseball as flipping a coin would have been.

Just to recap, Japan, the US and Mexico finsihed the second round with records of 1-2. The first tie-breaker in a three way tie is runs allowed per defensive inning in games against the other tied teams. Thus, since Japan and the US both allowed 5 runs in their respective 2 games, but Japan did so in two-thirds less of an inning that did the US, because the US was the visiting team against Mexico and therefore Mexico didn't bat in the bottom of the ninth in their game against the US. Mexico, you might recall could have advanced if, and only if, they beat the US by at least a score of 3-0 in a game that lasted at least 14 innings. That is simply not a legitimate way to decide that Japan should have advanced to the semi-finals. I can't, and no one else should, take the result seriously even though the games were generally well-played and exciting.

Anyone who is actually defending Soriano is a complete moron in this case. If being moved to LF is a demotion it's because he's a lousy second baseman, but I guess he and his agent are too much of an egomaniac to realize that.

Coach K absolutely was correct for leaving Williams in the game. Funny that the foul trouble for the LSU big guys didn't stop them from dominating the glass at the end of the games. I guess the preceding comments on Sheldon Williams and coach K just show that when you lose you're gonna be criticized no matter what you do

Does anyone remember the day in 1981 when top seeded Depaul and Oregon State lost to huge underdogs St Joe's and Kansas state on the same day in the round of 32. I don't buy this parity thing at all. It's just a matter of perception

Unless you had UCONN winning it all it was probably in your interests for them to lose that game even if you had them winning that game in your bracket. For example, because I had them losing in the semis and everyone else who had a chance to pass me in my 6 person pool had them advancing to the title game, the Mason victory clinched it for me even before my champion Villanova went down.

LSU certainly deserves a mention. Their two big guys look like the real deal and I think they were 12-2 in the SEC this year. How they were a 4 and tennessee was a 2 is one of those mysteries that will never be solved. In retrospect their advancing seems so logical until you realize they only beat Texas A&M on a buzzer beater 3.