The simple simple truth

[crabbcatjohn]

Wouldn't surprise me lol, but what round did I miss??? There are a few that I piggy backed cuz winners and losers can play at the same time....

I don't know, I didn't scrutinize your schedule that much
I've been playing one pocket most of the day. I just know it takes 10 rounds to finish a 32 double elim with a single final. If you count to the left it will give you the correct number. I do see you have softened your stance a little on certain race to two scenarios. I appreciate that. One of my main concerns is penalizing a faster players next match when the slower player in the previous match caused it. Making independent decisions like that on the fly without actually watching every match is a tough chore and a hard lesson for a director. Whoever has to do that ain't going to make friends...lol. IMO it's better to keep the races the same regardless of what's decided. Just schedule to start on Thursday night if you have to have 3/3 so you don't have 12-14 hour days on any given day...

 

[NH Steve]

I don't know, I didn't scrutinize your schedule that much
I've been playing one pocket most of the day. I just know it takes 10 rounds to finish a 32 double elim with a single final. If you count to the left it will give you the correct number. I do see you have softened your stance a little on certain race to two scenarios. I appreciate that. One of my main concerns is penalizing a faster players next match when the slower player in the previous match caused it. Making independent decisions like that on the fly without actually watching every match is a tough chore and a hard lesson for a director. Whoever has to do that ain't going to make friends...lol. IMO it's better to keep the races the same regardless of what's decided. Just schedule to start on Thursday night if you have to have 3/3 so you don't have 12-14 hour days on any given day...

You are right of course -- I missed the 3rd place match. That makes either for a late night Sunday or you have to play round three Friday, meaning an earlier Friday start, or a later Friday night. Or you might have to go with race to 2 in more rounds. Anyway I fixed it below/

First day with 32 players
Round 1: 32 players 16 matches (played on 16 tables)

Round 2: 16 winners to be played simultaneously with
16 one-loss players (total of 16 played on 16 tables)

First day with less than 16 tables, has to start early -- like noon -- because the above two rounds now become essentially four rounds, but no one is ever waiting for more than one match to finish so their second match can begin. With a noon start, taking advantage of open tables, other matches can carry on, so the worst that can happen is a player going back-to-back in successive long matches (has to be partly their own doing). These players will have to play out their round Friday night. That is very reasonable to ask -- everyone has to finish at least two matches that first day!!

2nd Day The tournament is now down to 8-12 tables at the most for the rest of the tournament, so from Round 3 on, it makes no difference whatsoever whether we are in a room with less than 16 tables or more. Saturday is likely to be a long day, with 4 rounds, so a preferred start time would be 10 AM.

Round 3: 8 players that won their one-loss match vs the 8 that lost their second round winner side match play 8 matches.

Round 4: 8 winner side players play 4 matches, starting as soon as tables from the one-loss round become available. As tables continue to become available, the 8 players in the one-loss side that won in Round 3 play their 4 matches. Since these matches play simultaneously with the winner side matches, it amounts to one round for timing purposes.

Round 5: The 4 players that won their one-loss match vs the 4 that lost their winner side match play their 4 matches. These matches start as soon as tables and players become available.

Round 6: The 4 players that advanced on the winner side play two matches, at the same time the 4 players that advanced in the one-loss side play their two matches. Since these matches play simultaneously with the winner side matches, it amounts to one round for timing purposes. The two losers in the one-loss side finish in 7th/8th place.

Sunday final day -- also a long day with four rounds to finish. 10 AM start is kind of imperative.

Round 7: The 4 remaining players in the one-loss side play their 2 matches, with the losers finishing in 5th/6th place.

Round 8: The 2 players that advanced on the winner side play their match for the hot seat, at the same time the 2 players that advanced in the one-loss side play their match. Since these two matches play simultaneously, it amounts to one round for timing purposes. The loser on the one-loss side finishes 4th in the tournament.

Round 9: The loser of the hot seat match plays the player that won on the one-loss side. The winner goes to the finals and the loser finishes in 3rd place.

Round 10: Finals single race, winner of the hot seat gets the first break.

 

[El Chapo]

Does anyone have a ballpark figure on how long these "longer matches" tend to go?

 

[jtompilot]

Does anyone have a ballpark figure on how long these "longer matches" tend to go?

5+
I think the longest one was 6+.

 

[crabbcatjohn]

Thanks Steve. I know you have spent a lot of time on this and it's obvious your really trying to make everybody happy while doing what's best for the tournament.. It's much appreciated.
Now that you've done this scheduling yourself and seen what the scheduling really looks like, I think now you can see what the problems have been all along. You see, I have already done all this before Chicago and Cali. After Chicago failing after I brought up the scheduling problems I was even more vocal about the problems before Cali and again ignored as a complainer. So I didnt go.
Now you have Tom and several others backing out of the seniors and as I explained before, people will not keep on attending tournaments who's formats don't allow timely finishes each day.
One thing that still stands out is your saying we might have to increase the races to two for more matches or have a late night. I mean, why have a late night at all as you say might be necessary and make all the losers go to two? Seems like the simplest solution with no other tweaking, shot clocks or grady rule needed for slow play. I really don't see a down side to timely finishes each day.

 

[Cory in dc]

Four point plan from the school of Crabb Man and Miller…..

Here’s the simple truth:

(1) Tourneys need to either (A) start a day earlier -or- (B) start early the first day

(2) You have to play 2 rounds on both the loser and winner side the first day (for a 2 day regional event, you have to play 3 on the loser side)

(3) Loser side matches need to be races to 2 (unless you start a day early – see point #1 above)

(4) Matches that go over “x” amount of time need a mechanism to speed them up….shot clock, proceeding racks to 6 balls, or grady rule…..pick one

(I told myself I wasn’t going to weigh in on this anymore, and here I just did…..:frus)

You're welcome

Crabb is definitely right. If you want double-elim and need a timely finish, then it needs to be 3-2. It doesn't matter how many rounds there are total, it matters how many rounds there are in the *losers bracket*. There are more matches in the losers bracket so you end up with the winners side waiting around for the losers side to catch up.

There are only two solutions:

1. Have a double-elimination tournament and make the losers side go faster than the winners side with shorter matches: 3/2 races.

2. Don't have a double-elimination tournament. Here are two options for this: (1) round robin feeding into single elimination brackets or (2) a modified double elimination. The latter would be something like once the winners side is down to 8, those 8 play for 65% of the pot, paying out 1-2-3 and the losers side plays for 35% of the pot, paying out 1 and 2.

 

[El Chapo]

5+
I think the longest one was 6+.

That is longer than I thought. Def tough to run a tournament when some matches are going almost as long as a 9 to 5 work day. Were they taking lunch breaks

 

[crabbcatjohn]

That is longer than I thought. Def tough to run a tournament when some matches are going almost as long as a 9 to 5 work day. Were they taking lunch breaks

Needless to say unwatchable too. As a tournament director you need a plan in your back pocket if matches like this happen.

 

[Scrzbill]

It’s not true we need to go to 3/2. I have stated why and unlike you guys who keep beating a dead dog. I’m not going too.
Steve, work out the scheduling with two rounds Thursday night after the auction at 6pm.
We end up with four players last day.
I’m dead money, if I get to play two matches I’m lucky and you want to reduce the amount of games I get to play?
Who else is dead money that is pushing for fewer games?

 

[El Chapo]

Needless to say unwatchable too. As a tournament director you need a plan in your back pocket if matches like this happen.

If I was in a match that long, unless it was like an ahead set or something of course, I would be done. I mean I would not lose on purpose or anything but my hole is going to start getting shot at. In other words, unwatchable, and unplayable too, at least for me.

The way to beat a player like that, in my estimation, is because they are so afraid of offense there is obviously a reason for that. So I think in a general sense, when someone is so afraid to shoot, that equates to needing a lot of innings to get to 8. So, shooting at your hole with a feeling of almost impunity can definitely be the way to go. And guess what, that can make them clam up even more... so great, I can shoot even more.

I gotta say I played my fair share of one hole and I never once had a guy play me like what you are talking about. Things do seem a little faster paced in one hole on the west coast though, for better or worse. I have actually seen players get pressured many times in smaller one hole tournaments in LA for taking even a bit too long, or even not shooting too, believe it or not. Right or wrong have seen it many times from guys that command respect. Maybe there is something to that?

 

[Dennis "Whitey" Young]

Since RR play has been brought up by Cory and Miller, here are a few of my favorite quotes from the RR thread, which is now on pg. 5.

JrHendy; I like it and think it is a benefit to the players who come knowing the probability of them going deep in the tournament is low. Everyone gets to play lots of one pocket and a bad draw after traveling a couple thousand miles does not have you sitting on the bench after the first two rounds. It also solves the debate about only going to two on the one loss side.

Henry; I like anything that allows me to play pool all day instead of sit around. Never liked double elimination tournaments.

NH Steve; I also lean toward single elimination final rounds---it saves time and also is a bit more of an equalizer between the range of player skills we have in our group, so upsets would be a bit more likely. I think that is a good thing, and makes for a bit extra excitement because of the added unpredictability!

Jeff Sparks; This sounds like fun, and a real bang for the buck.

These quotes are in regards to RR format suggestions for MOT. I feel if the MOT goes to this next year then the Seniors event may follow suit, and I also feel they could just become the greatest one pocket tournaments around! I feel this way because players are guaranteed they will get to play more matches before they are eliminated, and at the same time be able to play more players. To me, this sets a model for the future and OP.org should be the ones to lead the way. Whitey

 

[crabbcatjohn]

If I was in a match that long, unless it was like an ahead set or something of course, I would be done. I mean I would not lose on purpose or anything but my hole is going to start getting shot at. In other words, unwatchable, and unplayable too, at least for me.

The way to beat a player like that, in my estimation, is because they are so afraid of offense there is obviously a reason for that. So I think in a general sense, when someone is so afraid to shoot, that equates to needing a lot of innings to get to 8. So, shooting at your hole with a feeling of almost impunity can definitely be the way to go. And guess what, that can make them clam up even more... so great, I can shoot even more.

I gotta say I played my fair share of one hole and I never once had a guy play me like what you are talking about. Things do seem a little faster paced in one hole on the west coast though, for better or worse. I have actually seen players get pressured many times in smaller one hole tournaments in LA for taking even a bit too long, or even not shooting too, believe it or not. Right or wrong have seen it many times from guys that command respect. Maybe there is something to that?

I think the reason those went that long was those couple of tables were super tight. But two of the players also played slow. We are having a tournament here next week on limited tables. If a certain player I know shows up he could ruin that tournament. We didnt call him.

 

[crabbcatjohn]

It’s not true we need to go to 3/2. I have stated why and unlike you guys who keep beating a dead dog. I’m not going too.
Steve, work out the scheduling with two rounds Thursday night after the auction at 6pm.
We end up with four players last day.
I’m dead money, if I get to play two matches I’m lucky and you want to reduce the amount of games I get to play?
Who else is dead money that is pushing for fewer games?

This for our annual members tournament that starts on Friday. The Seniors starts on Thursday and should start Thursday early afternoon as it's on 8 tables.

 

[LSJohn]

Round Robin -- 4 groups of 8, race to 2.

For an event that many of us think of as more social than competitive, it seems odd to me that more people aren't commenting on the value of guaranteeing everyone at least 14 games as opposed to 5 or 6, and 7 opponents instead of 2.

 

[mr3cushion]

The above thoughts are for a, 'Dead Money player' looking for a lot of bang for their buck, which may include LUCK going to 2!

 

[jlcomp45]

One other option

One other option

If we’re not going to do RR, AND you truly want to stay at 3/3, one other idea would be to snag an APA modified double elimination bracket. Everyone is guaranteed to play 3 matches, but at some point, the loser side flips back to the winner and losing from there is out.

That’s how they get through so many teams in Vegas every year.

 

[crabbcatjohn]

Round Robin -- 4 groups of 8, race to 2.

For an event that many of us think of as more social than competitive, it seems odd to me that more people aren't commenting on the value of guaranteeing everyone at least 14 games as opposed to 5 or 6, and 7 opponents instead of 2.

This is my opinion on the RR. That is a lot of games to be played in two days so you can finish in a regular type bracket anyway. To my knowledge it has never been done in a recent 32 player one pocket event so we have no idea how match time would affect the outcomes of each group playing that many games in two days. It's also a huge scheduling nightmare for whomever is going to try to schedule all the matches or a the players who have never done it. On top of that none of us playing in the tournament have experience in both playing or running a 32 player RR format. And lastly what happens if we get 75% of the matches in and it becomes obvious that we won't have time to finish the rest? Are you personally guaranteeing this will work and as the advocate here are you volunteering to be there to help make all this happen?
...lol

 

[NH Steve]

Honestly I think there are just about all good ideas in here -- although some are conflicting lol!

You can see how are problems with schedule are a good petri dish for the difficulty with One Pocket tournaments in general -- such as DCC, which has so many more players and tournament rounds to get through!! Now that I think about it, and yes I have been to every DCC for at least the last 15 years, it is amazing they have not had more issues!!

For our member event I see the value in the round robin format because it is primarily a meet and greet first and a tournament second, so to speak.

For the Senior tournament and other double elimination events I can see races to 3/2 as a simple problem mitigator, but a big part of me (who is often traveling a long way) still wants to play races to 3 throughout.

Clearly, unless you have lots of time available, then for races to 3 to work within reason, you have to have some back up plans in place for limiting those potentially extra long matches. I know DCC is planning to do something this year -- most likely the possibility of shot clocks for slow matches along with the Grady rule -- as steps that the tournament desk can put in place for certain matches. They also might put certain "behind schedule" matches right in front of the tournament desk for easier monitoring.

 

[Dennis "Whitey" Young]

Round Robin -- 4 groups of 8, race to 2.

For an event that many of us think of as more social than competitive, it seems odd to me that more people aren't commenting on the value of guaranteeing everyone at least 14 games as opposed to 5 or 6, and 7 opponents instead of 2.

When the time comes for discussions on MOT 2019 then I believe members will speak up more. I did not want to capture this thread with RR discussion, but let Crabbcatjohn, Miller, and Steve work through this. Which I believe they have, and Crabbcatjohn & Miller have finally got the deserved attention to what it takes to run a tournament and finish on time. Although it is nice to remind them that "hey" there is a contingency that favors RR.

This is the members that participated in RR discussions; jrhendy, MKbtank, LS John, Catkins, Cory in dc, youngstownkid, darmoose, crabbcatjohn, 12 squared, tobermory, cincykid, El Chapo, Henry, NH Steve, Jeff Sparks, mr3cushion.

Crabbcatjohn, makes some very important points! This is why for the MOT I cautioned to stay with a race to 2. It would be nice if he and Miller held a RR tournament race to 2, single elimination final! I believe they could pull it off. Glad to see Steve recognize getting to play more games before being knock out, would be nice. IMO getting the players to initially come to the tournament in the first place, which a RR promotes, would be paramount.

 

[crabbcatjohn]

The above thoughts are for a, 'Dead Money player' looking for a lot of bang for their buck, which may include LUCK going to 2!

How are the RR games run in Billiards. I have no clue. Is there allotted time periods per game or do they play to a certain score so the game times vary ?