Mike,

I think I basically agree with you here. What we have is maybe two people who
said that maybe, if they were sure they were not going to play any sharks, they
might come to a tournament someday. Possibly.

Overhauling an entire system that has worked well for years to accomodate them
seems crazy.

Thanks again for your work in both Chat and Port.

-Bruce

________________________________

From: 18xx@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Mike Monical
Sent: Thu 7/2/2009 9:21 PM
To: 18xx@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [18xx] Re: Seeding: was Tournaments fair and fun





-- In 18xx@yahoogroups.com <mailto:18xx%40yahoogroups.com> , Scott Petersen
<scott@...> wrote:
>
> Is Mike Monical the keeper of the scoring system?

No, I just implemented what Dave and Mark came up with. They are significantly
different.

Chattanooga

Place points: .5 per person beat - .5 per person who out scored you.
+ % pts: your score/ave score times 3 cut off at 3.9 and 2.1 (a formula I think
was derived similar to puffing billy)

Portland

Place points: 1 point per person out scored.
+% pts, winner/ave for winner, score/winners score for everyone else

Mike and others, have you
> put thoughts into this that you could comment on?
>

While we have discussed seeding in the past I see it as unworkable and
unnecessary. Who would develop, keep or certify results. Even with simple
criteria it would require recording, reporting and tracking. Do we want another
dues paying organization? I think not.

Unnecessary because most of us already know who the sharks are and they are in
demand as opponents. With only one exception, I can think of no time the last 10
years where someone deliberately "gamed" the scoring system and I don't think
that will happen again. The tournaments I have been at have had remarkable
success in getting games organized for everyone and people having fun. Not that
everyone got to play every game they wanted or everyone one but enough to keep
it fun and entertaining for everyone(as far as I know). I do not think anyone
can dispute who won Chattanooga or Portland this year and it would be
interesting to see a scoring system where Bruce did not come out on top any way
you looked at it.

Subscribing to the age old adage, if it ain't broke, don't fix it, talk all you
want but I think any advantages far outweigh the disadvantages.






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]