| |
BGonline.org Forums
drawsheet mishaps
Posted By: Mike Main In Response To: drawsheet mishaps (Bob Koca)
Date: Sunday, 13 April 2008, at 2:09 a.m.
I’m glad to find a discussion on drawsheets on the web. Like Sam Pootle I’ve searched as to how others do / have done and there is precious little to find on the subject. Why? There is I think a certain amount of realisation by those that have delved into the matter that it is not such an easy nut to crack as one might presume. Then if they do crack it to their satisfaction by that time they realise that actually it’s quite a valuable product and as such why should they share it without any financial gain? Not good for the community in general I agree but spending hours upon hours trying every different combination to see where it might fall down is a lengthy task.
As yes, as Sam suggests, what works for say 33 players might well not work for 35 players. The easy solution is to start with a perfect 32, 64, 128, 256 etc. number of players but that means taking registration monies before the event, players committing to an event way up front and saying “sorry, we’re full” to those that miss the boat. The selling of tickets for Bg Tournaments is not a popular idea with established players. It can be done, I do it once per annum for Bg Live in London, but this event is neither designed for nor highly attractive to established players (money play is not a big feature.) Could established players be “re-educated”? Yes, but they are not going to like it. As such this is probably not a great way for a T.D. to attract as many players as he can and make his event grow.
About 3 years ago I tried a progressive Last Chance. I was told to expect 32-45 players so I built spreadsheets to suit. However we only had 23 players. Yikes! The Main worked fine, the progressive Conso was ok but the progressive Last Chance was a minor disaster. Back to the drawing board which, these days, is long nights in solitary confinement in front of a computer. Conclusion: There are so many variables involved in running a progressive Last Chance that I would probably be best to write a spreadsheet for every possible number of players. And even if I do that I know it’s not going to work perfectly well on the day if players X, Y and Z are eligible for it. This is because X doesn’t do Last Chances so he can go home to see the kids, Y will have been up all night (and might still be) playing in a chouette to make his money that way and Z has gone for a walk with his dog. As Sam Pootle says the T.D. needs to know who’s in and who’s out the night before a Progressive Last Chance. But that doesn’t cater for Y who say’s “I’m not sure – depends on how well I do in my chouette.” So why bother writing loads of sheets when the one you should use is going to messed up anyway?
Occam's razor: All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best. Take players as they apply to play, fill in names from the top and add names as they arrive / come back for more.
I generally find that players don’t even like progressive Last Chances. Are you telling me it’s not so in the USA? The Big Boys might like PLCs but are they really the ones that a Last Chance should be catering towards? Or are they just the ones who scream loudest so Last Chances are made progressive while the not so well informed and new players are left to suffer? (That’s it, I’ll probably get chucked off this forum for that comment about the Big Boys – oh well.)
Most players in the UK like the free for all style, get knocked out, come back in again, how many slots left now? Only 2. I’m 4-0 down to 5 points. Ok, resign this match that I made a mess of from the start and let’s start afresh while I can, here’s my re-entry money, I’m back in in seat 31. It’s exciting. It’s fun. It’s Sunday and they are in their leisure time.
Or if it’s a progressive Last Chance it’s: I’ve come to play not sit about waiting for an 11 pointer to finish and then when at last I do get to play it’s against some great big Big Shot who lost in the latter rounds of the Conso having lost in the latter rounds of the Main against whom I stands little or no chance.
Why should the Last Chance be populated in the latter rounds of it by the Big Shots? Isn’t it desirable for a lowly player to win a trophy? It might not make headline news but he’s certainly gonna tell his mates about it at work, when he next plays at his local club in Hicksville he’s gonna be toasted (ok, he won cash, he can buy the drinks then!) AND he’s gonna go back and play in the same tournament next year. Check out the attitude of players photos when they are snapped with a trophy. The Main winners do their duty and pose. The Last Chance and Suicide winners are the ones with beaming smiles. To most players weekend backgammon tournaments are about entertainment value. Most go with little expectation of actually winning a big tournament. Hence the T.D. MUST cater for them. The Last Chance and Suicide should be designed to give all comers an equal chance – not to pander towards the Big Shots who, if they really are so damned good, can win it having played the same number of matches in it as Joe Little.
So, before I start pulling out old Progressive Last Chance files from my computer and re-checking their viability, can somebody tell me please why do you use Progressive Last Chances in the USA? (if I’m correct in this assumption from reading these few posts.) Thanx.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.