Match update:
Match 7, Round 1: The Marriage Plot defeated Green Girl
Match 8, Round 1: Open City defeated The Art of Fielding
Leaders:
Darren G. 7
Jeremy Z. 7
Wilson K. 7
Alice K. 6
Andrew B. 6
Elizabeth L. 6
Felicity 6
Gary D. 6
Jamie B. 6
Mike R. 6
Kerry (me) 6
No one is perfect anymore and more than half the field is within two points of the lead. Each correct pick in Round Two is worth two. There will be a single leader after the next match as the three entrants at the top after Round One have each picked a different winner for today’s match.
Hungry Like the Woolf 
Quite a surprise to see ‘The Art of Fielding’ eliminated.
I certainly didn’t expect it. Having now read Open City (which I love), I am not dismayed by the decision, though.
I’ve been really looking forward to a review of Open City from you–are you going to write one? Hope so.
Alice,
I will review it. I was going to post Salvage the Bones first, but given it is gone for good and Open City has a match on Friday, maybe I will push Open City up to Thursday.
(And thanks for looking forward to it. That is always a nice thing to hear.)
Okay, Kerry you have got me. With three at the top, and only two books to choose from, how can each person have chosen a different book?
I’m finding this year’s ToB a disappointment. It seems as though every match is the same: a fair summary of both books followed by a decision that chooses the least likely choice. I haven’t learned very much about the books that I haven’t read and, quite frankly, think that most of those I have read have not been very well comprehended by the judge.
Then again, I guess it just illustrates different tastes and that mine and those of the Tob are quite different, even if we do read the same books.
I tried to be a little funny. One chose The Sense of an Ending, one chose Lightning Rods, and one chose….Salvage the Bones. There were actually four possible choices because of the timing of their picks.
I have found the commentary much more enjoyable than the decisions. Today’s judging (Lightning Rods picked by Roxy Reno) was a disappointment, both in substance and result. I can only whine so much, not having read one of the contenders.
You and I end up in the same boat with the TOB’s selections. Some are good, but most of the also-rans are, usually, not much to my liking. Open City has been a good find for me, though.. So, I still find benefit each year by finding a book I like that I otherwise would not have read.
Was it worth The Devil All the Time? I’m not sure about that.
The TOB has me looking even more eagerly towards Half-Blood Blues of Shadow Giller fame, however. I will get to that in April or May. (And I still have some other Canadian literature waiting on my shelves too…..and Woolf and Calvino and Nabokov……Each year, I think I should cut back on my TOB reading, and I have this year, but maybe even steeper cuts are in order and I can mostly just watch and cherry-pick the ones that sound like they are for me.)
Thanks for that explanation — it is fairly obvious, now that I think about it.
I also have been a bit disappointed with some of the judges’ explanations, whether or not I agreed with their decisions. It strikes me that they don’t write very much. TMN must give them a word count. If so, you’d think they’d devote their few words to analysis and leave the summary to the thousand or so places online where it’s available.
Kevin and John, on the other hand, have been top-notch. I recall being much more interested in their discussion last year too.
Every year, the color commentators definitely make the Tournament. This year the participation in comments seems to have increased and done a better job of discussing the relative merits of the books.
I think TMN does give them a word count and, for the first round, a request to discuss the plot of each. Hopefully, with ostensibly closer matches in later rounds, the decisions will become more focused on analysis and less “this book fit my mood better given I was locked in prison at the time”.