| |
BGonline.org Forums
It's time we had our own "Grand Slam"
Posted By: Stick In Response To: It's time we had our own "Grand Slam" (phil simborg)
Date: Wednesday, 16 April 2014, at 8:54 p.m.
Backgammon isn't tennis nor is it golf. Still, to my knowledge, it's only these two country club sports that have *majors*. Even though tennis has doubles, these sports are essentially a one man for himself sport.
In backgammon we have little to no use for the term 'grand slam'. The idea that someone would win all of these events even in the course of a career is a tall drink of an order. In golf there are only six male players ever, five modern, who have achieved what is commonly accepted as all the grand slam events in their career. A quick google tells me six women have won career slams in golf but I don't know any of the details.
In tennis I think only 3 men since the onset of the Open Era (1968) have done it. Agassi, Federer, and Nadal. On the women's side there are 5. Evert, Navratilova, Graf, Serena, and Screamapova. I don't know the doubles or mixed doubles details off the top of my head and I'm not going to look them up esp. with people switching partners a lot.
With golf we have 3 out of the 4 majors taking place in the US with the fourth being in the UK. Tennis has each major in a different country, Australia, France, UK, US. So for backgammon I would say we don't necessarily need to try to have the events dispatched evenly across the globe but it will likely end up that way anyway.
What makes an event a major?
- Biggest prize money
- Size of field
- Tournament length (tennis)
- Most ratings points
- Strength of playing field
I think that's the basic make up of what inherent properties a major must have. That's one issue with backgammon, prize money. If we had the rewards of a tennis or golf major the rest of the list would take care of itself. We don't so we need the players to show up first and then that increases the prize money but it is never big enough to tempt all the major players to come as golf and tennis do. We all love the game itself but bg has such a low/negative ROI after figuring in all expenses even the best of tournaments may not be able to peel certain players off their asses.
You lose in the first round of the US Open (tennis) and you get $32,000. You read that right, 32 grand. In golf's US Open for eg I think they pay about half the field with the cutoff being ~17k. These are very different of course because you have to qualify for these events in one way or another and any old schlub is going to be able to show up and play these backgammon events.
Maybe that's why it's hard to look at one backgammon event being more prestigious than another? If any old donk can walk up, drop his money, and win, well...Don't bother with arguing with me, I agree with you. They played the entire tournament just like anyone else would have had to and won. Respect right!
Just yesterday I was reviewing some more live matches and I came across the finals of one big event within' the past two years where the players over the course of a long match played a 10+ and 9+ PR. It was hard to watch. I imagined myself sitting around watching 4.0 tennis players or a 16 handicap golfer and thinking I wouldn't enjoy that either. Maybe that makes me a snob or just a jackass but that's not what I want to see in the finals, esp. the finals of a potential 'major' in backgammon. The way it's set up now that could happen.
You can skip the poker argument too. I get it, that's what makes the game so brilliant. Any old donkey can win and that's why some people play it. I would look at unregulated entry 'major' backgammon tournaments with the same scorn I eye the 'World Championships' of backgammon.
If we were to have majors and the potential for a grand slam I don't see any reason as of now to change the magic number from 4. We don't have that many bg tournaments to pick from anyway. If they're supposed to mean something there shouldn't be too many of them so as many of the top players can make it to them as possible. Like Keene I think said also, we don't want to dilute the brand.
Stick
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.