Go Back   OnePocket.org Forums > One Pocket Forum
Register FAQ Members List Social Groups Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 03-07-2019, 08:27 PM
darmoose darmoose is offline
Verified Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 1,273
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by youngstownkid View Post
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?
__________________
The early bird may get the worm...but the second mouse gets the cheese...Shutin@urholeisOVERATED.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03-07-2019, 09:38 PM
12squared 12squared is offline
Verified Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Posts: 1,397
Default

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

Thanks,
Dave
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-07-2019, 11:33 PM
Mkbtank's Avatar
Mkbtank Mkbtank is offline
Verified Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Philly Pa
Posts: 5,000
Default Waiting List Qualifier w/Seeded Finals

Quote:
Originally Posted by 12squared View Post
This stuff is so far above my pay grade, just tell me who I play and when.



Thanks,

Dave


Amen. Lol
__________________
Mitch needs to remember to play the score and that it's better to win than to look like a hero.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-08-2019, 03:40 AM
Tobermory Tobermory is offline
Verified Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Berkeley, CA 94708
Posts: 363
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 03-09-2019, 05:41 AM
LSJohn LSJohn is offline
Verified Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: monett missouri
Posts: 7,280
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by darmoose View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 03-09-2019, 05:45 AM
LSJohn LSJohn is offline
Verified Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: monett missouri
Posts: 7,280
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 12squared View Post
This stuff is so far above my pay grade, just tell me who I play and when.

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.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 03-09-2019, 03:02 PM
youngstownkid's Avatar
youngstownkid youngstownkid is offline
Verified Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,338
Default 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.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 03-09-2019, 03:14 PM
youngstownkid's Avatar
youngstownkid youngstownkid is offline
Verified Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,338
Default Waiting List Qualifier w/Seeded Finals

Maybe a “King of the Hill” Qualifier is a better name. Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 03-09-2019, 03:28 PM
mr3cushion's Avatar
mr3cushion mr3cushion is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL
Posts: 6,027
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by youngstownkid View Post
Maybe a “King of the Hill” Qualifier is a better name. Thanks.
This would describe this possible approach exactly!
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 03-10-2019, 10:19 AM
jlcomp45 jlcomp45 is offline
Verified Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Cape Girardeau MO
Posts: 257
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by youngstownkid View Post
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!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All original content Copyright Onepocket.org and/or the original author. All rights reserved.