| |
BGonline.org Forums
Giant 32 Criteria
Posted By: Jake Jacobs In Response To: Giant 32 Criteria (Rich Munitz)
Date: Tuesday, 15 September 2009, at 12:10 a.m.
Hi Rich (and Perry and Christian - I read a number of posts before replying here):
I think machine-readable lists from the drawsheets of all major tournaments, collected in a central DB, is an excellent idea, and should advance on its own merits. What constitutes a "major" tournament is, as Christian points out, not easy to resolve. I'm certain that the Danish club tournaments he mentions are larger, and have tougher fields, than many prominent events. We use "regional or higher" (no specified number of players) tournaments that are promoted as "open," i.e. no upper bound on skill.
I'll comment here, once again, that to date our problem has never been inundation by unqualified voters, the "problem" almost every solution seems to be addressing. Our problem has been too few voters, though overall they have been fine and highly qualified. We years ago experimented privately with one of Perry's suggestions: renorming using only the votes of the Giants themselves. (The end product was very close to the original; there was no "aha!") Those readers with a mathematical cast of mind might pause to consider what it says about the average Giant voter, that we were able to perform this experiment.
At any rate, as Chuck (and "hi" to you too) mentions, it's a big job, calling for a volunteer. The Giant committee would be much more open to the vetting called for when and if such becomes feasible. Right now it simply isn't practical.
To test this I'd recommend a simple experiment. Determining eligibility is much, much easier than ineligibility. Our own (crude) method works like this. We get a ballot (we have of course, no restriction on recipients of votes, it's the voters who must be eligible) from someone we have never heard of. We ask ourselves: "Who is this Perry Gartner?" It is determined that he is from New Jersey. Using our contacts Carol and I query players and directors from the East Coast, and sure enough we learn that Perry's nickname is the Hoboken Hurricane, that he has placed in the top twenty in the Camden points race two of the last five years, and - crucially - he played open in the 2005 Garden State Championships, where he did poorly but won a Blitz qualifier.
To eliminate Perry using the proposed changes we would have to show that he appeared - was it fewer than four times in 64+entry open fields during the past two years? Easier than determining that, let's make the qualification: appeared once in any open event in the last two years. So here goes the challenge. In a separate thread Stick gave a link to the betting line for Prague. Prove that, prior to Prague itself, each of those players is an eligible Giant voter by documenting at least one open-level entry.
The list is much shorter than what we deal with, and these are all international players planning to enter the event in Prague. Should be a piece of cake! Then you can teach Carol the trick, and everyone will live happily ever after.
Best,
Jake
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.