Australian cuesports
Tournament Format
What is your opinion on the best format in the current game of 8 ball, 9 ball international rules minimum 32 runners maximum 128.
1) Double Elimination with top 16 seeded.
2) Double Elimination with all players drawn equally.
3) Round Robin with top 16 seeded.
4) Round Robin with no seedings and all players must qualify.
5) Straight Knockout with top 16 seeded.
6) Straight knockout with all players drawn equally.
I think it should be Double elimination up to the Quarter Finals with top 16 seeded, as playing regular events and accumilating points you should be rewarded for your seeding title.
Another perspective of looking at it would be from a novice point of veiw to play the round robin, straight knockout, because they would get more games and could make it it a few rounds in by playing someone at their own level.
What are your thoughts? What goes quicker, whats the advantage?
1) Double Elimination with top 16 seeded.
2) Double Elimination with all players drawn equally.
3) Round Robin with top 16 seeded.
4) Round Robin with no seedings and all players must qualify.
5) Straight Knockout with top 16 seeded.
6) Straight knockout with all players drawn equally.
I think it should be Double elimination up to the Quarter Finals with top 16 seeded, as playing regular events and accumilating points you should be rewarded for your seeding title.
Another perspective of looking at it would be from a novice point of veiw to play the round robin, straight knockout, because they would get more games and could make it it a few rounds in by playing someone at their own level.
What are your thoughts? What goes quicker, whats the advantage?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Travis Crawley on -
It all depends on;
* How much time you have to run your event;
* How many nominations do you expect;
* How many tables you have.
Once you know these questions, then you can best decide which format to use.
The best thing about double elimination is... it keeps all the players at the venue for longer which keeps the venue owner happy because they get to sell more drinks etc...
Personally... I prefer a straight knockout (seeded) with long races.
-
Permalink Reply by Maher El-Omari on -
Hi Trav,
Mate there is so many options isnt there, I like your method for straight but longer races endurance style, and not the cut throat race to 2 in the group stages.
In saying that you could be a great player and draw 4 or 5 other great players in your group have the break and dry break they clean up, then break and run, thats it down 2 - 0 does not reflect the player you are.
But also the other perspective, is the average player who then can get a golden break and then opponent dry breaks and you run out, same thing its all in the long race I beleive so that you can really get the better player.
Thanks for your input.
-
Permalink Reply by Graham Tough on -
I would love to be in a position where we could mirror the UK tour - ALL single elim, but races to 10 all the way, and 3 separate comps over a weekend. Unfortunately we do not have any suitable venues to date so our hands are tied for now.
Personally I prefer double elimination to a certain point, then knockout to finish.
NSWPBA have come up with two different formats for our comps this season - double elimination qualifiers with last 32 KO and round robin qualifiers with last 32 KO - again, these are governed by strict time schedules as a result of venues having no other income streams but hopefully by this time next year we will be in a better position. For now we are trying our best to provide our members with good value, high quality events and i fully expect these to get better as our profile grows.
The suggestion box is always open folks, so feel free to comment!
-
Permalink Reply by Maher El-Omari on
-
I liked the NSWPBA FORMAT...... but make it double elim through to the quarters. but as you said graham venues need the constant stream of cash.
Graham Tough said:I would love to be in a position where we could mirror the UK tour - ALL single elim, but races to 10 all the way, and 3 separate comps over a weekend. Unfortunately we do not have any suitable venues to date so our hands are tied for now.
Personally I prefer double elimination to a certain point, then knockout to finish.
NSWPBA have come up with two different formats for our comps this season - double elimination qualifiers with last 32 KO and round robin qualifiers with last 32 KO - again, these are governed by strict time schedules as a result of venues having no other income streams but hopefully by this time next year we will be in a better position. For now we are trying our best to provide our members with good value, high quality events and i fully expect these to get better as our profile grows.
The suggestion box is always open folks, so feel free to comment!
-
Permalink Reply by John Tonner on -
IMO, true double elimination only exists when EVERY player has to loose twice before being eliminated, regardless of how far into the comp they are. If you start out with double elim and move the finals to single elim, then you have unfairly penalising the player(s) still on the winners side, depriving them of first loss lifeline, and that's just plain wrong.
I am always infavour of true random draws. If seeds are needed, then top 4 seems more "new player" friendly, and still gets the big guns in the finals together.
Double Elim is better than Single because it gets the places sorted more correctly.
Round robin can become a teams event too easily.
-
Permalink Reply by Alexander Waddell on -
hmm interesting....
My faviourt format is:
Top 16 or 32 seeded through to Sunday, everyone else plays a round robin to 'qualify' for the Sunday. These that play on the saturday make the bottom of the sunday draw, weather its 16 or 32 go through to sunday to make the full draw of 32 or 64.
Sunday is Double Elim.
Just as Trav said, it depends on time, amount of tables etc etc....
There are a few reasons why this is my faviourt format tho:
Firstly, It gives players that are traveling for the tournament a good amount of games, and also weather there traveling or not, but gives the lesses players heaps of frames. This is always good, so they can play a good amount, get match/competition practise, and play alot of different players...
Also the lesser players don't get white-washed by a seeded player unless they make the sunday. lol
Another good thing about this format is the Seeded players are only there to play for the one day, and they would normally pay a higher entry fee then the others. So there would be more prize money added.... :)
So, in other words, if there are no time limits on the use of the tables, this would always be my prefered tournament format...
Cheers! :)
-
Permalink Reply by Luke Hough on -
Round robin with top 16 seeded always good value
-
Permalink Reply by Alexander Waddell on
-
Yea, thats right luke. Always good value!
Luke Hough said:Round robin with top 16 seeded always good value
-
Permalink Reply by Dal Mark on
-
Double Elimination is the dumbest thing I have ever heard of, your only making it easier for the better players.
The fairest system is the stagged draw we do in Snooker.
Why?
Well 2 non ranked players get to play each other, the winner then gets to play a 32 ranked player with a match under his belt, if he wins that, he then goes on to play a top 16 player with 2 matches under his belt, or the top 32 player plays a 16 player with 1 match under his belt.
When we did straight draws, unseeded players were just getting pumped 3-0 1st round and stopped coming to tournaments. Now the unseeded players have a heap of 3-2's with the top players, which brings them back. Even Luke Hough is winning a couple of frames off the top players now.
-
Permalink Reply by Maher El-Omari on
-
Well I thought this weekends format was awesome 4 in each group on saturday and top 2 go through to the Sunday. Top 32 play Straight knockout and race to 7, 8 quarters, semis, and 10 final.
No seedings but 1 in each group. So everyone had to qualify, and not go through straight to sunday which at first I was a bit worried with the top players playing and just expecting to get through. A real quality field and still the 2 best players over the weekend made the final.
Hence saying the weekends format was succesfully run, 2 top players drew each first round Greg Jenkins and Stuart Lawler, just goes to show that all the top can also draw each other real early.
The Wagga boys Alex and Cody made the Quarters and Semis. Great effort. Ben Lavapie Quarters, Joe Sabia top 16. Any of these players on their day that played well still made it further than a top player because of the draw.
So in conclusion I must have to agree with the format the the NSW State 10 ball tournament format is the best I have played so far, Quick efficient and many games but yet still easy in some ways and tough in others.
What do you think?
-
Permalink Reply by Graham Tough on
-
I think it worked well, just unfortunate that the venue doesn't have a bar and therefore the tables are their only source of income - which means we need early starts and early finishes so they can sell the tables again during the busy times.
The reason there were a couple of the top seeds drawn together was that quite a few did not top their group. If they had all performed as expected they would not have met until the later stages - this is my main reason for NOT seeding players into the knockout rounds as everyone has a fair chance to play these guys and beat them! Indeed several seeds did not even qualify so I think the format is justified.
The staggered draw is great when you have a massive player base, but just now the NSWPBA are not quite up to that level, and i personally think it is very elitist - how hard is it to break into the top 16 when they are automatically into the last 32 of every event?
-
-
Not hard at all if your ranking points are right.
If you win 1 National Ranking system, you will be in the top 16 in Australia. Unseeded players also get bonus points for taking frames or matches off the top 16.
An unseeded player beating a top 16 player 1st round, would be about a 5% chance, give that unseeded player a match under his belt, and his percentage improves to about 30%.
As a player, I would much prefer the straight knockout, as I know an unseeded players has less chance of beating me, because I will adjust to the table conditions & pressure better, but give that same player a win and 3-5 frames under his belt, and that player becomes much harder to beat.
Al the top players complain about the stagged draw.
As for your numbers, we were getting 30 - 40 players, now we get around 80 - 100 since introducig the scatted draws. If unseeded players are winning a match or 2, or having close matches with the top players, they will come back for more.
© 2010 Created by Cueball.tv
