The simple simple truth

[NH Steve]

Steve,

Impossible to micro manage this or any other format to that degree. As I said to LSJ earlier, if a slow player fails to get enough matches completed he just pays the consequences of not qualifying for the finals. If he causes another player not to make the finals because he didn't get around to playing them, well, they know who to blame.

It's not micro managing when it is a significant problem. I think it is simple -- if you don't have a back up plan already in place for slow matches, then NO MATTER WHAT THE TOURNAMENT FORMAT you are inviting problems. RR does not by nature cure that. It's no secret that the fundamental issue is that certain styles of player and play can REALLY slow down the game of One Pocket, using the standard One Pocket rules, and that can cause cumulative issues for One Pocket tournaments. That's an incontrovertible fact!

So, you want to punish the poor last player/s that are stuck playing the one player or two players that did stall the RR portion?? I can't see that going over well.

 

[mr3cushion]

It's not micro managing when it is a significant problem. I think it is simple -- if you don't have a back up plan already in place for slow matches, then NO MATTER WHAT THE TOURNAMENT FORMAT you are inviting problems. RR does not by nature cure that. It's no secret that the fundamental issue is that certain styles of player and play can REALLY slow down the game of One Pocket, using the standard One Pocket rules, and that can cause cumulative issues for One Pocket tournaments. That's an incontrovertible fact!

So, you want to punish the poor last player/s that are stuck playing the one player or two players that did stall the RR portion?? I can't see that going over well.

Like I said, The room better furnish boxing gloves, with each set of balls!

 

[NH Steve]

One more RR point. By the end, when things are probably dragging out in some groupings, a good number of matches will be moot as it would already be determined who is advancing. The players should stay late and play for bragging rights, but it wouldn't hold up the Sunday elimination phase. Of course, some late RR matches could also be pivotal.

Which of course, is another criticism of RR. The main advantage of RR is more preliminary matches for everyone as I see it. The main disadvantage is just what you said -- which in days of old sometimes may have led to intentional tossing of late matches to help someone else's chances, once a player is already statistically eliminated. I don't worry about that in our group, but I believe it is a historical reason why pool does not tend to use RR for cash.

If you just want people in the bottom half of the field to get in more games, simply offer a Second Chance tournament -- problem solved.

 

[NH Steve]

Yeah, but doesn't this essentially guarantee that the slow will be even more so the slowest? Because everyone else will have by now already played everyone but the slowest players, if you simply automatically go to the next available player. In fact you might even cause one of the slower players to have to wait until the next available player is available -- even though the slow player has only played one or two matches, and the other players meanwhile are on their 4th. And what if one of the slower players takes a longer lunch break? I mean, you would expect them to be exhausted from just finishing a grueling match, right? I think you would need to make sure you had an opponent ready for the slower players, in anticipation of the slower player finishing their match finally, rather than players simply jumping on next available opponent.

In fact, you have to have two players waiting to play the two players who will be finishing the slowest match -- preferably not the two next-to-slowest-players that just finished right before the very slowest -- after these four take a good lunch break

 

[mr3cushion]

Which of course, is another criticism of RR. The main advantage of RR is more preliminary matches for everyone as I see it. The main disadvantage is just what you said -- which in days of old sometimes may have led to intentional tossing of late matches to help someone else's chances, once a player is already statistically eliminated. I don't worry about that in our group, but I believe it is a historical reason why pool does not tend to use RR for cash.

If you just want people in the bottom half of the field to get in more games, simply offer a Second Chance tournament -- problem solved.

MOT players would think of dumping! No wonder pool is at a permanent standstill!

 

[mr3cushion]

In fact, you have to have two players waiting to play the two players who will be finishing the slowest match -- preferably not the two next-to-slowest-players that just finished right before the very slowest -- after these four take a good lunch break

With ONLY 4 players in a group, this unlikely to happen! Like I said, 2 rounds the most any player will sit out!

 

[darmoose]

It's not micro managing when it is a significant problem. I think it is simple -- if you don't have a back up plan already in place for slow matches, then NO MATTER WHAT THE TOURNAMENT FORMAT you are inviting problems. RR does not by nature cure that. It's no secret that the fundamental issue is that certain styles of player and play can REALLY slow down the game of One Pocket, using the standard One Pocket rules, and that can cause cumulative issues for One Pocket tournaments. That's an incontrovertible fact!

So, you want to punish the poor last player/s that are stuck playing the one player or two players that did stall the RR portion?? I can't see that going over well.

Steve,

I understand, just was thinking of a possible solution, might be a problem.

How about just forfeiting the slow players matches to those that didn't get to play them because time ran out (if you can determine who the culprit was)?

While I know this could reward the players who didn't get to play the slow player, it should motivate the slow player to speed up knowing he will be disqualified if he don't. Just looking for a solution, regardless of the format.

 

[LSJohn]

FINALLY, something that makes a little sense! :frus:frus

Sorry, I lost my head.

 

[Dennis "Whitey" Young]

For me, if I am traveling 2,000 mi's (J. Hendy's thoughts) I would like to get the most bang for my buck, if possible. If that bang is not there, I would wait for the MOT to return to the west coast, that is just my circumstances of weighing it.
I will take playing the 14 games and all the possible down sides vs. dbl. elimination race to 3, even with a loser cancellation tournament, if traveling 2,000 mi's.
If MOT stays with 3/3 it is now very obvious that at some point they will have to go to 3/2. Whitey

 

[Dennis "Whitey" Young]

There has been a lot of trepidations concerning going to a RR format which is primarily aimed at for discussion the 14 game RR format since it seems this currently is the front runner for RR. And yes all angles need to be considered, for this and RR itself is an all new un-tried format.
1. Dumping; yes this could happen! To prevent it I would have the score sheets of each match put into a sealed box w/ slot, and only the match recorded as having been played. At the end of the flight, open the box and tally the scores.
2. Slow games; there will 4 tables going at once, and finishing at different rates. The players that are finished can then enforce a per/shot clock on the slower matches if they are lagging behind schedule.
3. Time to play a rd, and we'll discuss 14 game RR. This @ 45/min. avg. is 10-1/2 hrs. best case scenario. IMO it will go longer! Waiting for tables, break from play, and possibly slow matches. Remember, safe guards could be emplaced but will they work? So 10-1/2 could @ avg. 1hr./game turn into 14 hrs. This would not be good! No one really knows for sure how long a RR will take, they do take time!

Therefore for the 1st MOT trial run of RR, I then would suggest going to mr3cushion's format! On 16 tables it will take 9hrs. @ 45 min/game - or 12 hrs./1hr./game. Playing 8 groups of 4 goes quicker, thus it is a safe guard when there is limited time available. And the main reason mr3cushion can not advocate 4 groups of 8 for they take longer!
The positives:
1. it maintains the race to 3 as used in the 3/3 traditional format, 'which should be "very appealing" to traditionalists'!
2. each rd. of the group has a winner/loser, therefore a player can say; " I beat this guy or a player can say I lost to this guy". Which makes for more excitement within each rd.
3. Traditional scoring of win/loss to determine top 2 that adv. from each flight, with tie breaker being ball count.
4. Players will play 1 extra rd. or 3 players, instead of 2 players to get to the rd. of 16. On avg. based upon the Seniors bracket the score will be 3/1. Thus on avg. each player will play 4 games = 12 games and 3 rds.
5. 2 rds. can be played Friday night, leaving 1 rd. to be played Saturday morning, or vise- versa. But either way 16 players adv. using 8 tables in flight of 4 different players than they played in the pre-lims. This means a total of 6 different players will have been played by ea. player at end of 16.
6. Maintains a 50/50 chance of adv. from the rd. of pre-lims & rd. of 16.
7. Sat. a single elimination losers tournament could be held with whoever wants to get in, and/or match up play opens up. 8 tables are open.
8. Sunday a 8 player single elimination with championship match extended.

Therefore, if we combine the above mentioned top 3 suggestive safe guards with a RR race to 3, I think one can be pretty sure it can be successful. Now, this is for the 1st trial RR format MOT 2019. And if everything goes very well and there is plenty of time then of course for the next MOT 2020 then consider going to a longer RR format of 14 games, or other suggestions that will take longer.

When the vote comes, the appealing 14 games is of course more risky (will definitely need assurances of early start Friday, may need to play later into the night (eliminating free time Fri. night) & early start Saturday a must, IMO) vs. RR race to 3. Just letting everyone know! This is all becoming very time consuming for all those spending the time to discuss these new venues, but it is historic worth while endeavor for one pocket. And once fine tuned it will be the greatest One Pocket tournament ever! Whitey

 

[Island Drive]

There has been a lot of trepidations concerning going to a RR format which is primarily aimed at for discussion the 14 game RR format since it seems this currently is the front runner for RR. And yes all angles need to be considered, for this and RR itself is an all new un-tried format.
1. Dumping; yes this could happen! To prevent it I would have the score sheets of each match put into a sealed box w/ slot, and only the match recorded as having been played. At the end of the flight, open the box and tally the scores.
2. Slow games; there will 4 tables going at once, and finishing at different rates. The players that are finished can then enforce a per/shot clock on the slower matches if they are lagging behind schedule.
3. Time to play a rd, and we'll discuss 14 game RR. This @ 45/min. avg. is 10-1/2 hrs. best case scenario. IMO it will go longer! Waiting for tables, break from play, and possibly slow matches. Remember, safe guards could be emplaced but will they work? So 10-1/2 could @ avg. 1hr./game turn into 14 hrs. This would not be good! No one really knows for sure how long a RR will take, they do take time!

Therefore for the 1st MOT trial run of RR, I then would suggest going to mr3cushion's format! On 16 tables it will take 9hrs. @ 45 min/game - or 12 hrs./1hr./game. Playing 8 groups of 4 goes quicker, thus it is a safe guard when there is limited time available. And the main reason mr3cushion can not advocate 4 groups of 8 for they take longer!
The positives:
1. it maintains the race to 3 as used in the 3/3 traditional format, 'which should be "very appealing" to traditionalists'!
2. each rd. of the group has a winner/loser, therefore a player can say; " I beat this guy or a player can say I lost to this guy". Which makes for more excitement within each rd.
3. Traditional scoring of win/loss to determine top 2 that adv. from each flight, with tie breaker being ball count.
4. Players will play 1 extra rd. or 3 players, instead of 2 players to get to the rd. of 16. On avg. based upon the Seniors bracket the score will be 3/1. Thus on avg. each player will play 4 games = 12 games and 3 rds.
5. 2 rds. can be played Friday night, leaving 1 rd. to be played Saturday morning, or vise- versa. But either way 16 players adv. using 8 tables in flight of 4 different players than they played in the pre-lims. This means a total of 6 different players will have been played by ea. player at end of 16.
6. Maintains a 50/50 chance of adv. from the rd. of pre-lims & rd. of 16.
7. Sat. a single elimination losers tournament could be held with whoever wants to get in, and/or match up play opens up. 8 tables are open.
8. Sunday a 8 player single elimination with championship match extended.

Therefore, if we combine the above mentioned top 3 suggestive safe guards with a RR race to 3, I think one can be pretty sure it can be successful. Now, this is for the 1st trial RR format MOT 2019. And if everything goes very well and there is plenty of time then of course for the next MOT 2020 then consider going to a longer RR format of 14 games, or other suggestions that will take longer.

When the vote comes, the appealing 14 games is of course more risky (will definitely need assurances of early start Friday, may need to play later into the night (eliminating free time Fri. night) & early start Saturday a must, IMO) vs. RR race to 3. Just letting everyone know! This is all becoming very time consuming for all those spending the time to discuss these new venues, but it is historic worth while endeavor for one pocket. And once fine tuned it will be the greatest One Pocket tournament ever! Whitey

Whitey, would appreciate any comments on the WBT thread.

All I ever think about is ''fair play''. In any competition. that's how I roll.

 

[darmoose]

There has been a lot of trepidations concerning going to a RR format which is primarily aimed at for discussion the 14 game RR format since it seems this currently is the front runner for RR. And yes all angles need to be considered, for this and RR itself is an all new un-tried format.The 14 game RR format came from the 21 game format, where the tournament would be played in 4 groups of 8, so that everybody would be playing 7 matches (3 games/match) against 7 different players. You cannot guarantee 14 games to every player playing 8 groups of 4 and playing races to 3. Also with the 8 groups of 4 the players will only get to play 3 other players before half the field is eliminated.

1. Dumping; yes this could happen! To prevent it I would have the score sheets of each match put into a sealed box w/ slot, and only the match recorded as having been played. At the end of the flight, open the box and tally the scores.

2. Slow games; there will 4 tables going at once, and finishing at different rates. The players that are finished can then enforce a per/shot clock on the slower matches if they are lagging behind schedule. I think with 32 players whether we go 8x4 or 4x8 there will be 16 tables going at once to start.

3. Time to play a rd, and we'll discuss 14 game RR. This @ 45/min. avg. is 10-1/2 hrs. best case scenario. IMO it will go longer! Waiting for tables, break from play, and possibly slow matches. Remember, safe guards could be emplaced but will they work? So 10-1/2 could @ avg. 1hr./game turn into 14 hrs. This would not be good! No one really knows for sure how long a RR will take, they do take time!

Therefore for the 1st MOT trial run of RR, I then would suggest going to mr3cushion's format! On 16 tables it will take 9hrs. @ 45 min/game - or 12 hrs./1hr./game. Playing 8 groups of 4 goes quicker, thus it is a safe guard when there is limited time available. And the main reason mr3cushion can not advocate 4 groups of 8 for they take longer!Playing 8 groups of 4 does not go faster than any other format. It just gives you fewer games to play so it takes less time. A 45 minute game lasts 45 minutes in any format.
The positives:
1. it maintains the race to 3 as used in the 3/3 traditional format, 'which should be "very appealing" to traditionalists'! There is NO losers bracket, so there can't be a traditional 3/3 as you are referring to.
2. each rd. of the group has a winner/loser, therefore a player can say; " I beat this guy or a player can say I lost to this guy". Which makes for more excitement within each rd. If that is truly important to anybody, the same thing can be accomplished by playing an odd number of games, like 3 games/match.
3. Traditional scoring of win/loss to determine top 2 that adv. from each flight, with tie breaker being ball count.
4. Players will play 1 extra rd. or 3 players, instead of 2 players to get to the rd. of 16. On avg. based upon the Seniors bracket the score will be 3/1. Thus on avg. each player will play 4 games = 12 games and 3 rds.
5. 2 rds. can be played Friday night, leaving 1 rd. to be played Saturday morning, or vise- versa. But either way 16 players adv. using 8 tables in flight of 4 different players than they played in the pre-lims. This means a total of 6 different players will have been played by ea. player at end of 16.
6. Maintains a 50/50 chance of adv. from the rd. of pre-lims & rd. of 16.
7. Sat. a single elimination losers tournament could be held with whoever wants to get in, and/or match up play opens up. 8 tables are open.
8. Sunday a 8 player single elimination with championship match extended.

Therefore, if we combine the above mentioned top 3 suggestive safe guards with a RR race to 3, I think one can be pretty sure it can be successful. Now, this is for the 1st trial RR format MOT 2019. And if everything goes very well and there is plenty of time then of course for the next MOT 2020 then consider going to a longer RR format of 14 games, or other suggestions that will take longer.

When the vote comes, the appealing 14 games is of course more risky (will definitely need assurances of early start Friday, may need to play later into the night (eliminating free time Fri. night) & early start Saturday a must, IMO) vs. RR race to 3. Just letting everyone know! This is all becoming very time consuming for all those spending the time to discuss these new venues, but it is historic worth while endeavor for one pocket. And once fine tuned it will be the greatest One Pocket tournament ever! Whitey

If you play races to 3, that has nothing to do with a 14 game or 21 game format. In races to 3 all the players will be guaranteed 9 games, and will probably get 12 games based on the avg. race you defined. Then half the field will be eliminated, having played with only 3 other players. The half of the field that progresses will get to play 3 more players.

Compare that to a format of 4 groups of 8 players playing either 2 o3 games per match, where everybody would be guaranteed either 14 or 21 games against 7 other players before anyone gets eliminated.

I would think for our first attempt at an RR for the MOT we ought to follow the time proven adage of KISS, and not worry about trying to maintain the components of a double elimination format such as 3/3 or preliminary and semi final rounds that aren't necessary and add nothing to the tournament, and only serve to eliminate half the field for no good reason.

 

[Miller]

It's not micro managing when it is a significant problem. I think it is simple -- if you don't have a back up plan already in place for slow matches, then NO MATTER WHAT THE TOURNAMENT FORMAT you are inviting problems. RR does not by nature cure that. It's no secret that the fundamental issue is that certain styles of player and play can REALLY slow down the game of One Pocket, using the standard One Pocket rules, and that can cause cumulative issues for One Pocket tournaments. That's an incontrovertible fact!

So, you want to punish the poor last player/s that are stuck playing the one player or two players that did stall the RR portion?? I can't see that going over well.

the underlying problem with large a RR is that it is a large RR....

:lol

carry on.....:frus

 

[Island Drive]

the underlying problem with large a RR is that it is a large RR....

:lol

carry on.....:frus

Then lets do a Bucket Tournament, a term Youngstownkid mentioned.

 

[youngstown]

The simple simple truth

Now you’re finally coming around...now just need to convert you from draws to the waiting list, lol. plz read my last journal entry if you haven’t already. It can be tweaked to only allow the winners to stay on once after a win to get everyone else more play, but I really don’t think it’s necessary. You just can’t get more games played any other way than having a waiting list.

 

[El Chapo]

Could it be possible that it is difficult to see the forest through the trees here?

I think what you all need to do is elect a single person who obviously has integrity and has a bit of time to think on it, to come up with a format. And that's it. All opinions considered and used as guidance. Way too many chefs in the kitchen though, at least from what I can tell.

 

[Dennis "Whitey" Young]

Darmoose, I do not know if you ever attended a MOT, but it is a beautiful experience. Just getting to actually meet fellow members, share stories, and play players that all swing a respectable stick. I only got to watch a part of one match between Jay and Frank, it was hill/hill and the game was winding on down, Jay shot a great 3 railer putting Frank in a spot, the rail birds were all there, each having more experience in their little finger than I in my whole body. You could just feel the comradery they all had for each other. It was great!
Being under the weather I left Sat. and like others watch matches on stream. Very good stream and commentating. From playing in it and watching I believe most every player shot their shots in a reasonable time, matches had a good pace.

I flip flopped in my last post because of all the trepidations of what could derail the 14 game RR. But in thinking about my experience with MOT, no one is going to dump, and the pace of play, I would say is excellent. What derailed the Cal. MOT was not playing farther into the one loss side, because they did not want to eliminate anyone on the first day, 'RR solves that problem'.

Of course the 14 game RR is more desirable, I mean you get to play 7 players, and no one is out the first day, 50 percent adv. to play different players in the rd. of 16, but those in charge of pulling this off must have their ducks in a row. When I suggested doing the draw on Thursday and having the player meetings about rules of play already decided to shorten a players meeting, thus only leaving the Calcutta on Friday, I did not receive any comments back. When I stated to start as early as possible on Friday and Saturday I did not get back any comments back, and this takes planning with the host pool hall. So therefore between the trepidations and lack of responses I just said go with RR race to 3, for it will get you to the rd. of 16 faster, and I am 'sure' it can be pulled off.

I wanted to exactly point out RR in detail in my last thread, and to let members know that a 14 game RR playing 4 rds., will probably go late into Friday night, after that with a early start on Sat. I believe everything will work out.
A point about organization, prior to the tournament all the brackets have to be figured out, prelims , rd. of 16, and 8 man signal elimination. There is a lot to know about in doing these RR brackets!

But, at this point all you and I are doing is working through this making suggestions, the real thread on MOT format will start after DCC. thanks Darmoose! Whitey

 

[darmoose]

Darmoose, I do not know if you ever attended a MOT, but it is a beautiful experience. Just getting to actually meet fellow members, share stories, and play players that all swing a respectable stick. I only got to watch a part of one match between Jay and Frank, it was hill/hill and the game was winding on down, Jay shot a great 3 railer putting Frank in a spot, the rail birds were all there, each having more experience in their little finger than I in my whole body. You could just feel the comradery they all had for each other. It was great!

Being under the weather I left Sat. and like others watch matches on stream. Very good stream and commentating. From playing in it and watching I believe most every player shot their shots in a reasonable time, matches had a good pace.

I totally agree with your assessment regarding the beauty of one pocket, in all it's intricacies, and the value of our MOT tournaments and members sharing the experience. I did get to attend the MOT in Chicago, met a lot of the guys and had some fun, wish I had played better, but, I'm sure most everyone feels that way.

I flip flopped in my last post because of all the trepidations of what could derail the 14 game RR. But in thinking about my experience with MOT, no one is going to dump, and the pace of play, I would say is excellent. What derailed the Cal. MOT was not playing farther into the one loss side, because they did not want to eliminate anyone on the first day, 'RR solves that problem'.

Again, I agree.

Of course the 14 game RR is more desirable, I mean you get to play 7 players, and no one is out the first day, 50 percent adv. to play different players in the rd. of 16, but those in charge of pulling this off must have their ducks in a row. When I suggested doing the draw on Thursday and having the player meetings about rules of play already decided to shorten a players meeting, thus only leaving the Calcutta on Friday, I did not receive any comments back. When I stated to start as early as possible on Friday and Saturday I did not get back any comments back, and this takes planning with the host pool hall. So therefore between the trepidations and lack of responses I just said go with RR race to 3, for it will get you to the rd. of 16 faster, and I am 'sure' it can be pulled off.

I wanted to exactly point out RR in detail in my last thread, and to let members know that a 14 game RR playing 4 rds., will probably go late into Friday night, after that with a early start on Sat. I believe everything will work out.
A point about organization, prior to the tournament all the brackets have to be figured out, prelims , rd. of 16, and 8 man signal elimination. There is a lot to know about in doing these RR brackets!

Playing 14 games at 45 minute per game is 10.5 hours. If you play 4 matches on Friday that's 8 games and 6 hours of play. You are proposing to play the other 3 matches of 6 games and 4.5 hours on Saturday to complete the 14 games per player. Then you are proposing to start and complete the round of 16 made up of 4 groups of 4 players playing, I presume races to 3 (which average 4 games per match) which totals 12 games per player and 9 hours. That gives you a total playing time on Saturday of 13.5 hours minimum with no break time or time allowed for setting up the new groups. If you start play on Saturday morning at 10am you will be playing 13.5 hours and that's to
11:30am Saturday nite, plus whatever time gets added for breaks and setting up the new groups (which could add several hours).

To me, this seems to be untenable, and bodes for problems come Sunday for sure. And all this so you can have a semi-final round of 16, which I don't think is advisable, and serves no good purpose other than to eliminate half the field.

Better to do this. Set up 4 groups of 8 players at the beginning of Friday's play. Play matches of either 2 games (which will take a total of 10.5 hours), or matches of 3 games (which will take a total of 15.75 hours) to finish sometime Saturday evening. Under this plan, if you play the 6 hours on Friday that you have previously planned, then you would have either 4.5 hours or 9.75 hours of play on Saturday to complete the 14 game or 21 game format respectively. Personally, I like the 21 game format best, I think it fits well into the two day period, and it gives everybody 21 games to play, guaranteed.

After the completion of either the 14 or the 21 games Saturday evening, we can select either 4 or 8 finalists to play on Sunday, very simple.

There is no need for a semi-final round of 16, as I see it. IN fact it takes potential games away from half the field for no reason.

Anyway, we are all trying to get the best MOT, and I am sure it will work out if we just listen to each other and evaluate the facts best we can. If you find anything in error regarding my suggestions, pls do not hesitate to say so.

But, at this point all you and I are doing is working through this making suggestions, the real thread on MOT format will start after DCC. thanks Darmoose! Whitey

 

[Dennis "Whitey" Young]

Darmoose; This is your statement; "Then you are proposing to start and complete the round of 16 made up of 4 groups of 4 players playing, I presume races to 3 (which average 4 games per match) which totals 12 games per player and 9 hours".

Not correct! I have stated with a 14 game format the rd. of 16 would be either; each player 3 games ea. or 4 games ea. depending on desired time remaining. 3 games ea. is 6hrs. 45 min. But just now this came to me, one could always play 2 games ea. = 4-1/2 hrs. in the rd. of 16, 'if 1st rd. of prelims is running long', and if the remaining 16 players want to end earlier on Sat. night, to have some "free time, and advert exhaustion"! Exhaustion does not translate into enjoyment, plus exhaustion surely favors the younger player! After prelims and by rd. of 16, 8 tables have open up for free time.

The transition from the prelims to rd. of 16 has to be smooth. So the score sheet needs to keep a running tally during the prelims. Top finishers 1-4 adv. The predetermined bracket of 16 must reflex this; The rd. of 16 will have the top 1-2 players playing against the bottom 3-4 players, and all players will play different players.

I just realized I am back on board in endorsing the 14 game RR format. The reason is; 'it is so flexible after prelims', for one can always go to 2 games ea. in rd. of 16.

Thanks Darmoose for hanging in there with me, I could of not got my thinking straight if it were not for you! Were on the same page with achieving more playing time and games played before a player is eliminated from the tournament.

For me and you it solves a player being out the first day with a 3/3 tournament, which is what they will have to go to, players being eliminated on the first day, period! And no consolatory losers tournament on Sat. is going to match or come close to a RR format of playing more games and more players. Playing in the big cheese tournament for the big buck, and still in on Sat. with a 50-50 chance to adv. is where its at!

On your 21 game format, it really works for players that really want to have a lot of tournament play, and to get the maximum games in before being eliminated. And I see Island Drive is going to it, and others on these threads support it. Thanks, again Darmoose! Whitey

'Once again endorsing 14 game RR' !!! Remember Ghost vs. JrHendy today, you got to love it! thanks Scrzbill for the stream! Hope you also match up well!

 

[Scrzbill]

Blah ****ing blah. RR suggested by a billiard player. You said Dennis to one of our more deliberate players, the reason the tournament went long is we didn’t play enough early matches then you jump into the RR bull chip as THE solution. I have never heard anyone complain about being knocked out too early. It’s bull. If there aren’t enough rounds played the first day, then play more rounds. Or play two rounds Thursday night.
Or the five or six or you that want a RR tournament, have one and have fun. Leave the MOT alone.