24-Jan-2013, 10:50 AM
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?
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?