Super Senior Classic ll & Senior Classic l

Ok sports fans,

Super Senior Classic ll could be in the works.... According to Mr. John Rizzo, and he wants to start Senior Classic I (65/69 year olds) at the same time.... John is thinking spring, like mid April next year.

He's talking $2000./$2000./$1000. Added. $200.00 entry. 100% payout, with a minimum of 16 players per division, maximum of 24. No juice outta the players money, or the Calcutta money.
The $1000.00 is the prize for the overall Champion between the two divisions.
Same format, same rules, except it's 4 days instead of 3 and both divisions are playing more matches on opening day (Thursday) in order to finish on Sunday.

John is going out on a limb to do this fellows, as he has no commitment as yet from sponsors, but insists that if necessary he will put up $2000.00 himself. Hopefully there will be some sponsors jump on board and John will be off the hook. Just wanted to add this bit of info to let you guys know that John is one of the good guys, Old School Reigns!

I'm posting this very early in order to get feedback from the membership. I'm pumped about it myself, but I would like to hear from others here about the timing ( April ) and also about the possible snags and hang-ups that we might encounter.

I know it's way to early to ask for a show of hands, but I'm doing it anyway, I'd like to be able to show David Richardson and John Rizzo how many of you are interested in coming to Houston next year for a 4 day two division tournament.

If you're between the ages of 65 and 69 anytime in the calendar year 2016, you're eligible for the 1st Senior Classic. Over 70, you can play in both events if you are so inclined.

Who wants to play some OnePocket?

I want to play some one pocket and probably play in both. I'll use one to tune up for the other. Sign me up. This time I'm coming with guns blazing.

Jeff sparks said:

Ok sports fans,

Super Senior Classic ll could be in the works.... and they want to start Senior Classic I (65/69 year olds) at the same time.... They are thinking Spring, like mid April next year.

They are talking $2000./$2000./$1000. Added. $200.00 entry. 100% payout, with a minimum of 16 players per division, maximum of 24. No juice outta the players money, or the Calcutta money.
The $1000.00 is the prize for the overall Champion between the two divisions.
Same format, same rules, except it's 4 days instead of 3 and both divisions are playing more matches on opening day (Thursday) in order to finish on Sunday.

I'm posting this very early in order to get feedback from the membership. I'm pumped about it myself, but I would like to hear from others here about the timing ( April ) and also about the possible snags and hang-ups that we might encounter.

I know it's way to early to ask for a show of hands, but I'm doing it anyway, I'd like to be able to show David Richardson and John Rizzo how many of you are interested in coming to Houston next year for a 4 day two division tournament.

If you're between the ages of 65 and 69 anytime in the calendar year 2016, you're eligible for the 1st Senior Classic. Over 70, you can play in both events if you are so inclined.

Who wants to play some OnePocket?

Click to expand...

Probably goes without saying that I would play in both events. (I need the cash. )

Timing sounds good -- just so it doesn't wrap around April 1... I seem to have a lot of trouble on that day.

I'll come early to help John and David get ready if they think it would be helpful.

I would definitely want to play in the 65-69 tourney -- if I qualify by turning 65 in July next year.

I'll be 64 this December. That will, in all likelihood make me the youngest entry in the field. I can hardly wait to get my feet wet in this event. I know you guys who played in this first event had a great time. I want some of that fun too.

Thanks Steve,

Tom

SSll

SSll

I will be there to defend my title and try and beat those younger whippersnappers too.

NH Steve said:

I would definitely want to play in the 65-69 tourney -- if I qualify by turning 65 in July next year.

Click to expand...

I would want to highly consider ... but turning 65 late April 2016 ???

Would I qualify if event held early April?

Tom Wirth said:

I'll be 64 this December. That will, in all likelihood make me the youngest entry in the field. I can hardly wait to get my feet wet in this event. I know you guys who played in this first event had a great time. I want some of that fun too.

Thanks Steve,

Tom

Click to expand...

Bill said:

I would want to highly consider ... but turning 65 late April 2016 ???

Would I qualify if event held early April?

Click to expand...

Jeff's post says you have to be "between the ages of 65 and 69 anytime in the calendar year 2016." Sounds like you're both in.

I will be 65 so you can count me in.

Cory in dc said:

Jeff's post says you have to be "between the ages of 65 and 69 anytime in the calendar year 2016." Sounds like you're both in.

Click to expand...

Thanks Cory

Seems I need to learn how to read

gulfportdoc said:

Several thoughts about this proposal: First of all, I applaud John Rizzo for his commitment to one-pocket in general, and to older players' tournaments in specific.

I do see some logistical problems if the double tournament format is used. The main problem would be the use of only 8 tables. In the 65-69 division, it would probably fill to 24, since I'm guessing that there are more guys who qualify (including guys like Parica and Varner). The SS division would get at least 16 (some from the first event won't return, but new players might join in).

So there would be 40 guys to get through the 1st round for each event at races to 4, on 8 tables. That could not be accomplished in one day, maybe not in two. Matches would have to go from mornings to late into the evenings. There would be no tables available for practice, nor for matching up (except in the wee hours, like at the DCC).

There has been a great deal of interest for an aged 65-69 event. IMO the solution of having one on a different date made sense.

The idea of having the winner of each to compete for an additional $1K strikes me as a little unrealistic. Unless no mid-60's aged champions show up, it would be unlikely that the SS winner would beat the Senior winner. So, in effect there's and extra dime incentive for the better regular senior players to show up. And if the 65-69 field is full of SS players, then what is the point of it?

Still, if management is willing to put at least 4 more 9' tables in for the event, it could work.

But in my particular case, I'd have to pass. The initial SS event couldn't have been much better in terms of organization, ease of execution, and enjoyment. If it ain't broke..... I'd hate to see it get ruined by trying to embellish the format in attempts to be everything to everyone.

Good luck, no matter what!

~Doc

Click to expand...

I think the tournament directors would have a pretty good handle on it after running the first one and I expect they would use whatever tables were needed. The only way I could play in both was if they held them concurrently like they mentioned.

Either way, I am going to defend my title.

gulfportdoc said:

Still, if management is willing to put at least 4 more 9' tables in for the event, it could work.

But in my particular case, I'd have to pass. The initial SS event couldn't have been much better in terms of organization, ease of execution, and enjoyment. If it ain't broke..... I'd hate to see it get ruined by trying to embellish the format in attempts to be everything to everyone.

Good luck, no matter what!

~Doc

Click to expand...

jrhendy said:

I think the tournament directors would have a pretty good handle on it after running the first one and I expect they would use whatever tables were needed. The only way I could play in both was if they held them concurrently like they mentioned.

Either way, I am going to defend my title.

Click to expand...

I think they talked about using the second Bogies location for the first round or two. Not necessarily decided to do that, but considering it.

gulfportdoc said:

Several thoughts about this proposal: First of all, I applaud John Rizzo for his commitment to one-pocket in general, and to older players' tournaments in specific.

I do see some logistical problems if the double tournament format is used. The main problem would be the use of only 8 tables. In the 65-69 division, it would probably fill to 24, since I'm guessing that there are more guys who qualify (including guys like Parica and Varner). The SS division would get at least 16 (some from the first event won't return, but new players might join in).

So there would be 40 guys to get through the 1st round for each event at races to 4, on 8 tables. That could not be accomplished in one day, maybe not in two. Matches would have to go from mornings to late into the evenings. There would be no tables available for practice, nor for matching up (except in the wee hours, like at the DCC).

There has been a great deal of interest for an aged 65-69 event. IMO the solution of having one on a different date made sense.

The idea of having the winner of each to compete for an additional $1K strikes me as a little unrealistic. Unless no mid-60's aged champions show up, it would be unlikely that the SS winner would beat the Senior winner. So, in effect there's and extra dime incentive for the better regular senior players to show up. And if the 65-69 field is full of SS players, then what is the point of it?

Still, if management is willing to put at least 4 more 9' tables in for the event, it could work.

But in my particular case, I'd have to pass. The initial SS event couldn't have been much better in terms of organization, ease of execution, and enjoyment. If it ain't broke..... I'd hate to see it get ruined by trying to embellish the format in attempts to be everything to everyone.

Good luck, no matter what!

~Doc

Click to expand...

Sorry Doc, you will be missed.

Adding one table would make 10 if they used the Diamond table.
Say you played all 8 SS matches ( assuming 16 players) right after both Calcuttas starting at 2PM, and have two senior matches at the same time.

Next play the 8 winners bracket (4 tables) SS's down to 4 winners while playing 6 more matches of the seniors. Now the SS players are at 4 winners and 12 with one loss and there are 8 seniors with one loss and 8 seniors undefeated and it's about 7:00pm to 8:00pm and the SS players are done for the day.

Play the remaing senior players who have not played a match. They should be finished no later than 11:00 PM. Now everybody is done for the day, and nobody has been sent packing.

Day two is going to feature mostly 1 loss players from both divisions starting about 11am. The second day will see some casualties, players will have two losses and be knocked out. Play will continue until about 11:00pm at which time the field should be parried down to an easily workable number of players for the last two days.

I see no problems being able to finish on time, without stressing any of the players. The seniors will be the last matches every night, that's there handicap.

I don't agree that it will be a lock for the senior to win the overall. Granted, they have the edge, but in a race to 3, they could get beat. I just don't like the idea of handicapping the match, let em play even. I ain't askeert auh no kids!!

I'm pretty sure that this will be worked out well in advance of kickoff and I hope to everyone's satisfaction. As John said, the TD has lots of experience running bigger events than this ones going to be.

Jeff sparks said:

Ok sports fans,

Super Senior Classic ll could be in the works.... According to Mr. John Rizzo, and he wants to start Senior Classic I (65/69 year olds) at the same time.... John is thinking spring, like mid April next year.

He's talking $2000./$2000./$1000. Added. $200.00 entry. 100% payout, with a minimum of 16 players per division, maximum of 24. No juice outta the players money, or the Calcutta money.
The $1000.00 is the prize for the overall Champion between the two divisions.
Same format, same rules, except it's 4 days instead of 3 and both divisions are playing more matches on opening day (Thursday) in order to finish on Sunday.

John is going out on a limb to do this fellows, as he has no commitment as yet from sponsors, but insists that if necessary he will put up $2000.00 himself. Hopefully there will be some sponsors jump on board and John will be off the hook. Just wanted to add this bit of info to let you guys know that John is one of the good guys, Old School Reigns!

I'm posting this very early in order to get feedback from the membership. I'm pumped about it myself, but I would like to hear from others here about the timing ( April ) and also about the possible snags and hang-ups that we might encounter.

I know it's way to early to ask for a show of hands, but I'm doing it anyway, I'd like to be able to show David Richardson and John Rizzo how many of you are interested in coming to Houston next year for a 4 day two division tournament.

If you're between the ages of 65 and 69 anytime in the calendar year 2016, you're eligible for the 1st Senior Classic. Over 70, you can play in both events if you are so inclined.

Who wants to play some OnePocket?

Click to expand...

Jeff...just my opinion, but some others may feel the same...

I think that a slightly later date would be better, i.e. June or July...one main reason: The DCC ends around Feb 1st...it will be hard for me to take another trip just two months later...and also I would be more fired up if another coupla-few months went by between the two...also, isn't your poolroom emptier/slower business-wise in the summer months like most are, so that there would be more tables available to use?

- Ghost

The super senior could be kept at a 3 day format and the seniors could show up 1 day earlier for a 4 day format. Even if 24 players showed up for both events by doing it this way the seniors would have a little more time between matches and would finish a little earlier the final day. Pretty much nothing would change for the super seniors.

I would drop the idea of a final between the senior winner and the super senior and let 2 people go home real happy and no one would be exhausted (also a super senior might win both events anyway).

The senior format with 24 players would leave 4 on winners and 20 on losers after the first day (everyone gets to play 2nd day). 2 on winners and 10 losers after 2nd day. 1 winner and 3 losers after 3rd day. Final around 4pm 4th day.

Super senior format with 24 players would leave 4 winners and 20 losers after their first day. 1 winner and 5 losers after their 2nd day. Final around 6pm their 3rd day.

All of this could be done with 8 tables with at least 3 1/2 hours between scheduled matches on winners side and minimum of 3 hours between scheduled matches on losers side.

So if there are less players or more tables available it would work out even easier.

One Pocket Ghost said:

Jeff...just my opinion, but some others may feel the same...

I think that a slightly later date would be better, i.e. June or July...one main reason: The DCC ends around Feb 1st...it will be hard for me to take another trip just two months later...and also I would be more fired up if another coupla-few months went by between the two...also, isn't your poolroom emptier/slower business-wise in the summer months like most are, so that there would be more tables available to use?

- Ghost

Click to expand...

Maybe as late as May sir, but I'm thinking no later than that due to heat restrictions. The building is old, poorly insulated, with lots of glass frontage, and with 10,000+ sq. ft. to keep cool, well, let's just say it struggles with a small crowd present in July. Put a large crowd in there in June or July and it's gonna be miserable. We definitely want you there, so try to get fired up in a shorter time, please.....

Wayne said:

The super senior could be kept at a 3 day format and the seniors could show up 1 day earlier for a 4 day format. Even if 24 players showed up for both events by doing it this way the seniors would have a little more time between matches and would finish a little earlier the final day. Pretty much nothing would change for the super seniors.

I would drop the idea of a final between the senior winner and the super senior and let 2 people go home real happy and no one would be exhausted (also a super senior might win both events anyway).

The senior format with 24 players would leave 4 on winners and 20 on losers after the first day (everyone gets to play 2nd day). 2 on winners and 10 losers after 2nd day. 1 winner and 3 losers after 3rd day. Final around 4pm 4th day.

Super senior format with 24 players would leave 4 winners and 20 losers after their first day. 1 winner and 5 losers after their 2nd day. Final around 6pm their 3rd day.

All of this could be done with 8 tables with at least 3 1/2 hours between scheduled matches on winners side and minimum of 3 hours between scheduled matches on losers side.

So if there are less players or more tables available it would work out even easier.

Click to expand...

Thank you Wayne, all good information and the idea of dropping the playoff is sound also. You're absolutely right, I believe it would make for a happier ending, especially for 1 of the winners.

So if I'm understanding the staggered start correctly, day 2 could have as many as 28 matches being played, if both divisions had full 24 man fields? Using 8 tables and starting at 10 am that's approximately 8 matches every 3 1/2 hours, so at 2:00 you've completed 8, then at 6:00 PM 16 are finished, then at 10:00 24 matches have been decided, leaving 4 matches to play into the wee hours of the morning, or wait until day 3. The last 4 matches would only be a problem if the SS division had a full 24 man field, which probably won't happen. This seems workable with a good tournament director, because of the double entry of several people he will have to be cognizant of conflicts due to ongoing matches. But certainly doable IMO.

Thanks again Wayne

I think you will get more players for your super senior event this coming year than you did this year, as more players find out about the event. If your cut-off is 24, I think you can expect close to that considering you got 18 this first year. Word is going to spread. Some of you (many actually) will be at DCC in January and that is going to alert some of the other older players to the Super Seniors.

Likewise for the 65 tournament, which has a larger base of players to begin with -- I think you will have no trouble getting 24 if that is your maximum. So when working out your logistics I recommend preparing for full fields, because I think you are likely to get them -- or very close to it.

Wayne said:

The super senior could be kept at a 3 day format and the seniors could show up 1 day earlier for a 4 day format. Even if 24 players showed up for both events by doing it this way the seniors would have a little more time between matches and would finish a little earlier the final day. Pretty much nothing would change for the super seniors.

I would drop the idea of a final between the senior winner and the super senior and let 2 people go home real happy and no one would be exhausted (also a super senior might win both events anyway).

The senior format with 24 players would leave 4 on winners and 20 on losers after the first day (everyone gets to play 2nd day). 2 on winners and 10 losers after 2nd day. 1 winner and 3 losers after 3rd day. Final around 4pm 4th day.

Super senior format with 24 players would leave 4 winners and 20 losers after their first day. 1 winner and 5 losers after their 2nd day. Final around 6pm their 3rd day.

All of this could be done with 8 tables with at least 3 1/2 hours between scheduled matches on winners side and minimum of 3 hours between scheduled matches on losers side.

So if there are less players or more tables available it would work out even easier.

Click to expand...

Sounds right to me on all counts.

Thanks Wayne.