Tier 1 League Sheet

[5000 Years Old Man]

give a chance to vote rather than speculate

[deliverance]

You have a vote option available on this thread. It is currently 4-0.

[5000 Years Old Man]

give a chance to all to give their opinion rather than speculating for them

Jointly and Severally, a vote on two issues:

1) whether to implement these major changes to the game schedule only for tier 1 or for all tiers

2) whether to implement these major changes to the game schedule

---

this thread is read regularly by relatively few

---

there is already some evidence that at least some of the players in tier two would also favour this change

[JustTheTip]

I would vote for this to be for ALL tiers. The lower skill level teams may like the chance at luck based points but that does not mean that they enjoy playing roller-ball or three-man. (They don't. You should hear the groaning)

As a member of basement tier team, we want to improve and given a chance with a more tournament-like format may be good for our development. I think there is a misconception that the tier3 teams are there only for fun and are not trying to be competitive.

[5barwarrior]

Alrighty, then. It sounds like I need to survey our customers and find out what they like and dislike.

[5000 Years Old Man]

keeping in mind that players move across teams and team move across tiers I don't see much in the way of logical, durable, and positive reasons for doing the changes just for teams and players that at a given point in time are sitting in tier 1

I don't care to talk for others, but here I'm going right out on a limb and boldly state that most if not all our players would love to be playing in tier 1 - and would respectly request to be treated accordingly

[5barwarrior]

I agree, if there are things that players don't like in the sheet (3-man) then it will be eliminated. Things are the way they are in order to help improve players progress by having them play a variety of games in different positions. Obviously if this isn't fun for players we will adjust.

The original discussion about a tier one sheet was my idea and it was in order to placate some grumblings about games players didn't like. I also looked at it as an opportunity to make the game more competitive for the top players.

I'll do my survey and share the results tomorrow.

[jpguywatchout]

looking forward to it! it'll be interesting to see if the other tiers also vote to ditch those two spurious games.

j-poll

[5000 Years Old Man]

it's all good...

it'd be bad if we were squirrels -- squirrels fight and bite nuts

people, well people talk and can work it out

(maybe I should not post after a meal with couple glasses of wine)

[Jester]

Its great having these discussions, especially when there are people contributing from all tiers. Im glad Evan said what he did, and I agree with him 100%. Chris asked us last night if we would rather play every team or if we liked tier structure better. I told him that tier structure is good for our current 3 man team set up, but in the future I would like to see even one league per year change into a different format so that you are not continually playing the same people all night because an easy way to improve is to be exposed to a variety of games.

So heres my idea for a summer league, because summers in Canada are when most people take vacations and such, its difficult to make it out to league every Wed, not to mention the plurality of festivals that go on throughout the summer like Bluesfest, Jazzfest, Canada Day, etc. So instead of having locked in teams for all the weeks this is what I suggest. Each player stands alone, and has their own ranking from 1-5 that is decided at the start of the league by the league coordinator with 5 being the highest. People are free to team up with whoever they want that night for as many games as they want, so theoretically you could play 10 games that night with the same partner for 10 games with 5 different partners, its up to you. The lowest ranking a team could be is 2 and the highest ranking a team could be is 10 (add their rankings together). Each night we play 8-1030 for games that count towards league, everything after that is money games and pick up games and don't effect the points. Points are given to players individually to accumulate over the 8 weeks of league. A player is given a single point for showing up that night. Any team can challenge any other team, Lets get an example going:

Lets say 6 guys show up, Jon (5), Merv (5), DanP (4), Jesse (4), Casti (3), Van (2)

Lets say Jon+Merv team up (10 point team), Dan and I team up (8 point team), and Casti and Van (5 point team) team up.

These could be the benchmarks we set, lets say team A has 10 points, if they play team B who has 8 points the discrepancy is 2 points. In my opinion if team A wins they should get 1 point, if team B wins they should get 2. If teams are equal the winner gets 1 point. If the discrepancy is 3 points or more, lets say for example Jon+Merv play Casti+Van if J+M win they should get 1 point, but if C+V win they should get 3 points, I think 3 points should be awarded if the discrepancy is 3 or more points.

This would encourage top level players to play with some lower level players because of the potential to get more points per win.

Chris you said you have tried something like this is the past and it hasn't worked out, what were some issues that arose in the past?

[5barwarrior]

No consistency or commitment. People like playing with specific partners.

That being said, I'll organize anything you guys want.

[5000 Years Old Man]

leave well enough alone

On the subject of surveyed preferences last night I (eventually) indicated preference for OFA hats -- actually it was Mary that brought it up, and I merely concur.

The picture below show one such hat/cap. These were distributed at TG on occasion of one of the first leagues there, the photo was taken March 18, 2009. As I remember these caps were of pretty good quality.

[Image: http://i646.photobucket.com/albums/uu187...Size-1.jpg]

cheers

[SilentSam]

OK, I gotta chime in on this thread here...

1) 2-Ball is hella fun... it also teaches valuable skillsets. It's great for exercising reaction time, loose ball skills, etc. Quite a few people in Ottawa could benefit from more 2-ball, or another fastball type game.

2) Roto doubles shouldn't be limited to only one game. When I first started playing in league, the only time I ever got to touch forward in doubles was in Roto, and without that, I never would have developed any forward skills. If the aim of this new and improved sheet is to make us better players, we need more than 1 game of Roto.

3) 3-Man sucks. We've been saying this for years.

4) If everyone plays singles, and specialty, and there's 1 roto game, then it CLEARLY sucks to be player 3 now. There's no upside to it at all. There's no getting around this either, someone obviously gets the short end of the stick.

My vote would be to switch 3-Man with something that doesn't suck, maybe roto singles? Otherwise the sheet is as fair and balanced as it gets.

[garbaggio]

The difference between 3-man and rollerball is that rollerball helps you develop actual usable skills that are important during competitive matches (picking up balls, using your peripheral vision, quick shots, control). This is especially true once you have developed some control yourself. I can understand how it would be painful for some tier 3 players though. One of the reasons we have rollerball is because when we don't, it never gets played in Ottawa, and a lot of people end up developing only slow methodical games, and then they are unable to keep pace with fast, skilled players from out of town.

3-man, on the other hand, is useless for teaching you anything. It's not even that fun. 4-man was more fun. Everyone had 1 rod. But having 2 players handle a rod each against a player that is handling 2 rods is silly.

Anyway I'm not in the league, but I wanted to give my opinion because this is an overlooked point. (Well maybe not that overlooked. I see Dan just made the same point at the same time).

Taha

[5000 Years Old Man]

well I agree with most of the above two posts...

exceptions:

- besides dropping the 3-man consider dropping the specialties -- if everybody plays the singles then all activities in specialties are already covered and this could preserve 2-ball and expecially rotation games

- 4-man Taha, even more squeezed toghether?

edit (more seriously): though I see your point on the 4-man being more balanced than the 3-man, it is still a goofy contrivance