Formal Format Debate

[Semtex]

Well, I've had my say.
It's a shame that we can't change the format but everyone seems happy with how it stands.
I for one will not turn up for day 2 in the future to play meaningless 'friendlies'. If that means you have to remove all my results from day 1 so be it.

[Bounty Bob]

[Tripod]

But what I did not like is what it seems to be the best thing ever discovered for most of you: the "everybody plays the same lot number of games" format. I have already told privately, and I would like to say it here too: I want to get disqualified! For me, competition ended on saturday.

Interesting way of looking at it. But I'm afraid that won't do for me. Like Mark, I do want to play as many games as possible. And fighting for a final position is not nothing. If we were professionals, get paid for playing - sure, then I'd agree with you, the thrill is greater. But as I said, playing out final positions is not nothing - especially since they are official games. Coming 17th, as I remember from last year, is satisfying, too, because you have beaten several opponents in a row. Sure, I understand that people who were unlucky (or whatever) on the first day and suddenly found themselves in a group lower than the one they thought they'd qualify for, that's tough.

Well, I've had my say.
It's a shame that we can't change the format but everyone seems happy with how it stands.
I for one will not turn up for day 2 in the future to play meaningless 'friendlies'. If that means you have to remove all my results from day 1 so be it.

Haydn, what's up with you? I had hoped you were joking when you started ranting in capital letters. I'm sorry, but I'm not even sure what your problem is exactly. I understand you were unhappy about not making the middle group and thinking your opponents on Day 2 were too bad for you. But there simply is a cut somewhere - your suggestion of a league (not that I oppose to it) could also end the same way, you turn out to be the best of that group.

So I think, going back to my original post, your problem is my point #2. Ok, if I got you right you suggest that right from the top or starting from 17th place after day one we started forming leagues of 8 players of approx. the same level. So below the top 16 (assuming 4 groups, 12 players each again): A5, A6, B5, B6, C5, C6, D5 and D6 in a league and so on. But what happens if you underperform on day one? Then you'll end up in a league of 8 below the level you'd like.

Difficult coming up with a solution for that problem. I could offer an extra stage where, say, A4-B5, B4-A5 and A8-B9, B8-A9 (same again for C and D) meet. But that would devalue day one and have other consequences.

[uncle_colin]

I loved playing games on Sunday against people I might have a chance at beating, I know full well I have neither the skill or commitment to ever get close the later stages of a WC but I've paid my money like everyone else so I think it's only fair to get a similar number of games.

Absolutely spot-on.

I think what we have to decide is, are we looking for a format which is aiming to be as close to 100% fair to the elite as possible, or a format that caters for all participants, (and perhaps therefore, less alienation for newcommers who are the future of KO)

To be honest, I wouldn't have come if I knew there was a chance I would have next to nothing games on the second day. This format was perfect for noobs like me, but I can see how it's not ideal for the elite players. I got value for money and had a great time.

[Rodolfo]

Oh, I did not say what I liked!

The day 1 format was the best ever! 11 games against 11 people A=B.

Really brilliant

[Abyss]

Well, I've had my say.
It's a shame that we can't change the format but everyone seems happy with how it stands.
I for one will not turn up for day 2 in the future to play meaningless 'friendlies'. If that means you have to remove all my results from day 1 so be it.

[Robert]

Semtex is the new Manicx

Haydn is a lovely chap but that Semtex can be a bit much

Whoever said that at the WC was a funny chap!

[stox]

My turn to answer calmly the question

First of all, the question is a main topic interest for me since probably I will make the hosting bid on Rome. never the less, the final format will be decided by the wc comitee which will be formed in that case. Saying this, my thoughts are on this formula:

1. 3 TIMES 16 PLAYER GROUPS like this year, the 1-16, 17-32 and 33-48 was perfect. The 17th is the KOA CUP. The 33rd will get a bronze medal (aka STOX CUP ). Lets see the three groups like champions leugue, the old cup wnners cup and uefa cup! the rest go in a KNOCKOUT OF SHAME.

2. 4 GROUPS OF PLENTY OF PLAYERS like this year OR 8 GROUPS WITH LESS PLAYERS (in which case only the first 2 qualify to 1-16, 3rd and 4th to 17-32 and so on): Fewer games on day1 permits to make in the late afternoon the 1st round day2 matches, meaning less games on day 2 (more concentration) and prior closening of the event (all can see all games, instead leaving for airport, or it would be great to give on big screen also final 17-18 KOA CUP, 33-34 STOX CUP and all QF possible only with lot of time on day2).
I'm probably for IMMEDIATE KNOCKOUT GAMES on day2 meaning continue to play x1 as on day1 but probably making so the number of matches on day 2 for each are too small (4 instead of 8.... puah!).
But format depends VERY STRONGLY by the final registered player number! if we have 100 players then the groups should be 1-32, 33-64, 65-98 and 2 in game of shame, with 8 or 16 groups on day1.

3. CROSSMIXING FORMAT, no doubt. Day 1 compares players among ONE group, day 2 have to compare as soon as possible equivalent players BETWEEN groups. If at the end the same players of one group looses all, rematches cannot be avoided because one group was overall superior to the other. This must be determined immidiatly not at end of day 2.
A North&South mode has only sense if we make all country groups (all italian in one, all enslish in B, all greek in C and son on) and only the country champs or country equivalent players should meet among them. So NO NORTH VS SOUTH as in NBA, but CROSSMIXING as in all FIFA and UEFA soccer tournaments.

PS: I'm considering to introduce the AMERICAS CUP concept of choosing the opponent. Instead of saying that group A meet group B by default, I think that the 5th player with the most points (may be of group A,B,C or D) can choose one of the 6th, 7th or 8th player from ANOTHER GROUP of HIS choice. The second 5th player with most points can choose then his opponent by the one remaining IN OTHER GROUPS and so on. This type of format gives even a greater advantage to the best classified players and nullify completly the luck in the draw at day 2 since the crossmixing becomes free.

4. SHAME KNOCKOUT: loosers travels to the game of shame while winning players classifies 49-(n-2) where n is the number of players. The game of shame is on big screen. The playing settings will be decided by extracting with a draw these elements: pitch type, aftertouch x times, wind off/light, gravity. Obviously we will NOT PUT in the bowls the default setting so that a funny combination is garanteed

5. EXTRA TACTICS ALLOWED: i know its here offtopic but this has to be decided very soon! And this is the new element which can be accepted by all and can make difference in playing the game without changing the code or introducing new things. I wil start soon a topic on this specifily.

[alkis21]

Another thing we should remember is that the format is not independent of the number of players.
As much as most people liked this year's format with Top 16- Middle 16- Bottom 18, we won't be able to implement it if we have 40 people attending next year's WC.

[Sascha]

I thought of something like that we have "Gold" from 1-16 and "Silver" from 17-32 in such a case. With 33-40 in the "League of Shame" on Day 2.

[stox]

Ok, lets say that 32 players minimum will be there. Else we cannot make discussion without fixing minimum attendance.
In this case the two groups: TOP GROUP and KOA GROUP is always there. All the rest in the shame knockout? This can be a solution.

So if n players are registered:
TOP 1-16
KOA CUP 17-32
SHAME KNOCKOUT 33-n

where the game of shame is the final for the very last positions n/n-1.

This format is simple, universal and can be maintained for the next 10 years without complains or changes if n is not too high.

In reality you have x=INT(n/16) leagues. So:

1st class knowckout (TOP) 1-16
2nd class knockout (KOA CUP) 17-32
....
x class knockout league x*16+1 - (x+1)*16

and the rest in the shame knockout.

[filippodb]

the format discussion is quite useless since we don't have a real number of confirmed player.
Dipending of various factors the attending players should be vary from 40ish to 70ish, so we can't really afford a serious format debate now.

the options in case of massive player attendance should include 3x minutes games also.

Also KOA Cup inscription with sunday players should be considered to increase the overall attendance and decrease the submission fees.