waterloo [Updated October 2004]  

2004 WBC Report     

 2005 Status: pending 2005 GM commitment

Rob Beyma, MD

2004 Champion

2nd: Mark Gutfreund, KY

3rd: Tim Miller, GA

4th: John Clarke, FL

5th: Marty Musella, VA

6th: Bruno Sinigaglio, AK

Offsite links:

AREA Ratings


Event History
1991    Kevin McCarthy      17
1992    Rob Beyma      16
1993    Larry Lingle      16
1994    Joe Beard      18
1995    Joe Beard      10
1996    Bruno Sinigaglio      10
1997    Phil Evans      18
1998    Rob Beyma      16
1999    Chuch Stapp     17
2000    Rob Beyma     10
2001    John Clarke     18
2002    Rob Beyma     20
2003    Marty Musella     20
2004     Rob Beyma     17
Rank Name


 1. Rob Beyma


 2. Marty Musella


 3. John Clarke


 4. Chuck Stapp


 5. Bruno Sinigaglio


 6.  Mark Gutfreund


 7. Forrest Pafenberg


 8. Tim Miller


 9. Bill Scott


10. Larry Lingle


11. John Ellsworth


12. Johnny Hasay


13. Ivan Lawson


14. Steve Likevich


15. Greg Smith


16. Pat Mirk


17. James Tracy



Past Winners

Kevin McCarthy - OH

Rob Beyma - MD
1992, 1998, 2000, 2002

Larry Lingle - PA

Joe Beard - AZ

Bruno Sinigaglio - AK

Phil Evans - VA

Chuck Stapp - PA

John Clarke - FL

Marty Musella - VA

Another Grognard Classic

The 2004 tournament was played using a flex Swiss format followed by two rounds of single elimination. Players could play one game per day, Tuesday through Friday, with the best four players squaring off for the semi-finals and eventual championship game.

Open Swiss Phase

A total of 20 games were played in the preliminary rounds by 17 different participants. Contributing to this success are two things: The flexible format pioneered by Larry Lingle, and a bunch of grognards looking for tournament games to play after they have been waxed elsewhere.

The four best players from the Swiss phase squared off for first through fourth place. The best players were those who scored the highest based on their three best games using a formula similar to that used by VIP. A player received 10 points for a win, one point for a loss and two points for each victory tallied by an opponent that the player defeated. A running total of all player scores were prominently displayed at the Waterloo kiosk, with updates posted as each game ended.

Example of scoring during Swiss Phase: Moe beats Lingle and Shemp, but loses to Curly. Moe scores 10 + 10 for the wins and 1 for loss for 21 points. By the end of the Swiss Phase Lingle beats Tom and Shemp beats Jerry - Moe would receive four bonus points for the two wins attained by Lingle and Shemp. Moe's score after Swiss Phase - 25 points.

The key to this format is the record of the opponent that a player defeats. In the old days, many players hoped to avoid playing the "Great White Tournament Shark" Rob Beyma and other lesser sharks, as play against them usually ended their chances for a plaque. Not anymore. Players who racked up wins early found themselves being challenged by others who wanted a chance to score bonus points by beating a front runner.

Of the 20 games played in the early rounds, 13 were won by the PAA and seven by the French . Last year in the Swiss segment the French won five of 16 games. These results are good for the French, which is why most players wish to play the PAA. At Doncon 04, players could opt to use the old Avalon Hill ten-sided die (play by mail) CRT. It is interesting to note, that the player (Rob Beyma) who recommended the ten-sided CRT was also the chief whiner against its incorporation. The whining was bearable, however, because the "Hammerhead Shark" (Richard Beyma) and the "Mullethead Shark" (Bill Scott) were not impressed by Rob's flip-flopping. As punishment, Rob should be shipped off to the cold hell of Poker Flats for the winter.

The highest achievers during the Open Swiss phase were as follows:

Player           	Points for Games	   Bonus Points	   Total	   Finish
Mark Gutfreund	           30	         10	             40  	    1
John Clarke	              30	          6	             36  	    2
Robert Beyma	             30	          6	             36  	    3
Tim Miller	               21	          6	             27  	    4
Marty Musella	            21	          2	             23  	    5
Bruno Sinigaglio	         21	          0	             21  	    6


#1 Mark Gutfreund (PAA) vs. #4 Tim Miller (French)

This was a typical game wherein the PAA slowly gives up ground, sacrificing delay units until the bulk of the allied army enters the board. Tim took the pocket change kills and moved slowly around the allied strong points. Eventually, Mark assembled a good army in the center of the board. Tim hit the PAA in massive frontal assaults. The results were gruesome as scores of dead factors piled up on the edges of the board. Tim's dice bravely eliminated a good deal of the allied army and almost all of the French. Tim surrendered to Mark's PAA after two days of futility.

#2 John Clarke (PAA) vs. #3 Robert Beyma (French)
Report by the French Scribe - edited by the staff.

The French maneuvered forces to the two flanks and approached Quatre Bras cautiously. A number of 1 factor delay units were picked up on the first day. Two stacks of infantry and 20 cavalry factors were sent down the Tilly corridor. Late on the first day, the French pushed into the Quatre Bras gap but could only manage a couple of DRs on their initial attacks. The PAA rolled a DR on his counterattack.

Early on the second day, the right wing cavalry turned the Prussian flank at Wavre. The infantry, aided by one 2-6 cavalry unit made a 4-1 vs a 4-4 and forced the Dyle. On the French left, the French got across the river near the Braine Le Comte road. The PAA made some 1-2 surrounded attacks vs French infantry in the woods near QB with mixed results.

By the middle of the second day, the French had built a significant lead in casualties and had good position on the flanks. Although the PAA side had a lot of play left, John conceded. He had played a lot of games during the past four days and was tired. I can relate to that.

The Championship

Mark Gutfreund (PAA) vs. Robert Beyma (French)
Report by the French Scribe - edited by the staff.

Mark remembered playing Rob Beyma in 1992, but Rob had no recollection of that game (Staff Remark - Rob obviously lost the earlier encounter and has purged the memory). The French (Rob) did have some intel from watching some of Mark's (PAA) earlier games. Mark liked to move considerable forces to the Nivelles front to neutralize the French left while delaying the French right. The French once again maneuvered sizeable forces to both flanks. The approach to the Quatre Bras gap and the Tilly gap was slow as Mark strategically expended several delay units. The 15 French cavalry factors going down the right side of the board were delayed another turn by a 2-6 and then forced to stop for two turns by a 6-4 until the French infantry slugging their way down the Tilly corridor forced the 6-4 to withdraw.

Early on the second day, the fighting picked up in the Quatre Bras gap. The PAA made the first major attack but could only manage an EX. The French counterattacked at Quatre Bras and a French 4-1 also resulted in an EX. The two players traded 3-1 attacks which also resulted in exchanges. The French maneuvered some infantry to the SE side of the Quatre Bras gap forest to also threaten the heights. With a lot of forces at Nivelles, the PAA at Quatre Bras gap were getting thin. The French cavalry on the right caught up with the Prussian infantry and killed a 4-4.

On the French left, the PAA blocked the river crossing near the Braine Le Comte road with large units and concentrated their main force near Nivelles for a counterattack. The French infantry pushed into the forest gaps in front of Nivelles at the same time that the French were pressing hard at Quatre Bras and along the Dyle. A PAA attack at 4-1 on the Nivelles front yielded yet another EX. Note: Every 3-1 or 4-1 attack made by the French or PAA player in this game resulted in an EX. At this point the French player made perhaps the biggest strategic decision of the game. The French had an opportunity to make a 6-1 on a 7-4 but had to risk a 2-1 vs a 6-4 to protect the flank of one of the stacks in the 6-1 as well as expending a 2-6 soakoff unit. An A Elim roll on the 2-1 would be a disaster and an A-Back 2 would allow the PAA player to surround one of the French stacks. After deliberating for a couple of minutes, Rob decided to pull back to the river and threaten to turn the PAA right flank with the cavalry. Rob's thinking was that he was 34 factors ahead in kills, had good position, and did not need to risk a 2-1 at that point in the game. Interestingly, one experienced player watching the game commented that he would have taken the 2-1 and gone for the knockout punch (staff note: this was a subtle way of calling Rob a "Chicken _ _ _ _").

The PAA player now was forced with the choice of counterattacking or withdrawing some of his big units towards other threatened areas. Mark chose to make two 2-1s vs 6-4s in the gaps. The results were an EX and a A-Back 2. The PAA player conceded shortly thereafter. The French avoided a defeat on the left while slowly winning the battle on the right.

 GM      John Clarke  [2nd Year]   NA 
    jclarke1010@cfl.rr.com   NA

2004 Preview Page | View the Icon Key | Return to main BPA page