Waiting List Qualifier w/Seeded Finals

[darmoose]

Consider this scenario - player one stays on the table for 7 games. During that time an there were 30 names written to the waiting and some of them were written more than once. So player one gets placed on the waiting list at the bottom. Player 1 has played more games than everyone else. Should the TD move him up the waiting list because he has one fewer at bat? I say that doing that can make things weird. Also, as a TD, I want to run a low maintenance tourney, so I prefer not to keep track of things, if I can avoid it. For the first waiting list tourney I’d rather keep it as simple as possible, and I think the players would too.

Mark,

I was editing my last post because I realized that in the 18 hours of play over Friday and Saturday, you planned to have the first cut at 3pm on Saturday after 12 hours of play (which equates to 16 games @ 45 mins/game), so let me deal just with that initial period for now.

It seems my thought of trying to equal out the "at bats" is not good for reasons that you explained. What is important though, is for every player to get to play the same number of games. So, when your "player one" gets to play 16 games he stops. Play continues until all players get to play 16 games, keeping to the 45 min. standard. When the allotted time is up at 3pm on Saturday, all play stops whether everybody gets to 16 games or not.You make the cut as you have described and move on from there. Whether we do anything similar the rest of the way we can discuss later.

Doesn't seem like there is anything to keep track of there. When each player gets to 16 games he will have a W/L record, and he will be done til you make the cut and continue play with the remaining players.

How does that sound?

 

[12squared]

This stuff is so far above my pay grade, just tell me who I play and when. :lol

Thanks,
Dave

 

[Mkbtank]

Waiting List Qualifier w/Seeded Finals

This stuff is so far above my pay grade, just tell me who I play and when. :lol



Thanks,

Dave

Amen. Lol

 

[Tobermory]

Kings of the Hills might be the right name for this format.

So long as the waiting list on Friday and Saturday is reasonably short, this format works well to provide for plenty of games and random match ups for everyone. No 2 losses and you're out, which guarantees every player will get their money's worth. I like it!

I'm wondering, if we had access to 16 tables on Sunday morning, whether we'd actually need to eliminate anyone from the final day single elimination race to 2 tournament. If we want to reward the Kings of the Hills for their superior play on Friday and Saturday, we could seed the top 16 contestants so they play the bottom 16 in the first round, or give them the first break. There might even be a way to give out some byes as the reward...not sure.

If this is not a "chips" format, so we don't need to call it a chips event, then let us strive not to use the word "chips" any longer....

...unless someone who knows what a "chips" format it could explain what it is. I'm still curious about that.

 

[LSJohn]

Mark,


What is important though, is for every player to get to play the same number of games.

Generally speaking, the better players will play more games in any given amount of time. If I am reading you correctly, you're suggesting that everyone already having 16 games completed sits down and waits for the slower players to catch up. I wouldn't be one sitting down, but I think this is not good.

But, dammit, it does seem that equal number of games is important.

 

[LSJohn]

This stuff is so far above my pay grade, just tell me who I play and when. :lol

Thanks,
Dave

Now that's a vote Steve (and all us nitpickers) like to hear. Ya can't beat, "I'll be there, I'll have fun, and I won't worry about the details." Two thumbs up!

Now if I had 31 guys like that, LSJohn's rules would be.....

aw, nevermind.

 

[youngstown]

Waiting List Qualifier w/Seeded Finals

Nobody is going to be penalized for winning too much. The goal isn’t to get all the kindergarten kids the same number of games. We’re not passing out participation trophies here.

 

[youngstown]

Waiting List Qualifier w/Seeded Finals

Maybe a “King of the Hill” Qualifier is a better name. Thanks.

 

[mr3cushion]

Maybe a “King of the Hill” Qualifier is a better name. Thanks.

This would describe this possible approach exactly!

 

[jlcomp45]

Nobody is going to be penalized for winning too much. The goal isn’t to get all the kindergarten kids the same number of games. We’re not passing out participation trophies here.

I call bs on that. I give Matt my money and get my participation trophy t-shirt!

 

[youngstown]

Waiting List Qualifier w/Seeded Finals

This would describe this possible approach exactly!

Actually I like “Challenge Table Qualifier” better...I wasn’t actually familiar with the term King of the Hill before you mentioned it...am I showing my youth? Lol