Posted By: Henrik Bukkjaer In Response To: doo doo (Coolrey)
Date: Friday, 7 February 2014, at 11:50 p.m.
In Response To: doo doo (Coolrey)
>> Why is the air filled with ways to change it? Is it so disgusting that the best player won? Do you want to introduce more LUCK now, to give us bozos a chance?
This is a reasonable question. Let me say why I pitched in (not directly saying you should change it, but listing what we do different for the same type of tournament in Denmark). There was another thread on the subject, where it was layed out as it being a scandal that the dual duel had so few entries. Why are so few players attending - was the question. I sort of tried to answer that, and at the same time chip in with our experiences in a thread where all sorts of improvements were suggested.
>> I think maybe have the entry fee be less, and the side pools WAY less. More people might try their hand, but then again, if the EFs induced more people to play in this event, with transcribing, streaming and finding volunteers to enter matches by hand... Well, you would need two weeks to do the event, in addition to other normal events.
I sort of tried to say these things in my post. You can have more participants if you want to (points 1 through 4), but then you'll end up with a problem (point 5, time). In other words, people (in particular the TD) needs to determine what they want to achieve with this tour. It might turn out that they are already in the sweetspot!
>> How many of these other formats would make it harder for Mochy to win? Is that the goal? I don't think so.
:> Doo doo is supposed to find the best player of those willing to put up the money to compete. It did that quite well, Ed, I don't think you believe you are better than Mochy though you might well believe you shoulda beat me!
:> By the way, the list of great players not willing to put up...
:> There is something wrong with that, imho.
The goal is not to find a format that makes Mochy win less. The goal is to find the best player.
But I think, if you read a bit more careful (at least some of the posts by the people you are trying to single out) that they all are saying they disagree with the best being purely the one to post the lowest PR in a match. PR alone is not the golden measurement of who's best. I think people are trying to suggest formats where you somehow mix PR and actual winning chances, to find the best player. Matches played where the sole purpose is to get the low PR, and winning means nothing at all, are ridiculous matches - that's the notion some of these players are trying to convey.
The formats I described used in similar tournaments in Denmark, all mixes PR, MWC loss and actual win of the match, to get the result. And they do heavily favor the stronger player.
>> Put your money where your mouth is, boys. It's not so bad to enter an event where you are not the favorite... You might learn something!
But some of these players may feel that dishing out $1K to play matches where you're not even trying to win, is somewhat silly.
Messages In This Thread
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.