|
Surrey Classic 2008
|
| bigdogdave |
Posted on 17-12-2007 22:32
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 128
Joined: 08.10.07
|
Date for this is 20th Jan
Discussions currently taking place on the Surrey Site.
Is anybody from here interested in attending this?
http://www.surreypool.com/viewtopic.php?forum=13&topic=852&start=20#f23549 |
| |
|
|
| Burn |
Posted on 17-12-2007 22:40
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 142
Joined: 04.10.07
|
Mr Dog
Website etiquette dictates that rather than trying to shepherd Croydon website users over to the Surrey site (aka stealing them), you have to visit regularly and contribute to this thread, right here, in the place you have started it.  |
| |
|
|
| bigdogdave |
Posted on 17-12-2007 22:50
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 128
Joined: 08.10.07
|
That is the plan Mr Burn
I have to start somewhere
The link was merely for people to view what has already been said if they are interested.
I want Croydon folk to start their own debate and let me know what they would like, where they would like it, how many would be interested etc.....
Edited by bigdogdave on 17-12-2007 22:52 |
| |
|
|
| Burn |
Posted on 17-12-2007 22:58
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 142
Joined: 04.10.07
|
I want a double eliminator, held at Suzis Q's, for 64 runners 
There is another bloke called Burn on the Surrey site, ignore him, he is not proper Croydon. |
| |
|
|
| Burn |
Posted on 17-12-2007 23:10
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 142
Joined: 04.10.07
|
Avatar for Dave...
 |
| |
|
|
| Burn |
Posted on 17-12-2007 23:16
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 142
Joined: 04.10.07
|
Or here's one at the right size...
 |
| |
|
|
| Sass |
Posted on 17-12-2007 23:59
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1804
Joined: 10.09.07
|
Burn wrote:
I want a double eliminator, held at Suzis Q's, for 64 runners
I'll second that! |
| |
|
|
| bigdogdave |
Posted on 18-12-2007 00:10
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 128
Joined: 08.10.07
|
Sass wrote:
Burn wrote:
I want a double eliminator, held at Suzis Q's, for 64 runners
I'll second that!
Keep the comments coming folks |
| |
|
|
| Golden |
Posted on 18-12-2007 00:17
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1641
Joined: 10.09.07
|
Burn wrote:
I want a double eliminator, held at Suzis Q's, for 64 runners
Ideal . . |
| |
|
|
| bigdogdave |
Posted on 18-12-2007 17:34
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 128
Joined: 08.10.07
|
If it was 64 runners it would probably be best of 5
32 runners would be best of 7
Are people happy with shorter distance matches? |
| |
|
|
| Sass |
Posted on 18-12-2007 19:14
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1804
Joined: 10.09.07
|
You would have ample time to have best of 7 on the winners side, best of 5 on the losers. |
| |
|
|
| bigdogdave |
Posted on 18-12-2007 19:21
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 128
Joined: 08.10.07
|
Sass wrote:
You would have ample time to have best of 7 on the winners side, best of 5 on the losers.
Interesting idea
Liking that |
| |
|
|
| Burn |
Posted on 18-12-2007 19:25
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 142
Joined: 04.10.07
|
Not according to the all-seeing spreadsheet that calculates total Tourney time.
http://www.playpo...lcalcs.xls
And surely different game lengths on both sides will cause absolute chaos, and a domino effect of delays. |
| |
|
|
| Sass |
Posted on 18-12-2007 20:00
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1804
Joined: 10.09.07
|
I don't think increasing the frame distance on the winners side will have a massive effect. It's the losers side that always holds things up in my (albeit limited) experience of double elims.
Changing the subject completely I had a comp idea the other day which is a little different to anything I?ve seen done before.
Straight knockout ? 64 players
Round one losers into a 32 player plate comp
Round two losers in the main event go into the second round of the plate comp (ie to play the winners of the plate first round matches).
No idea if anyone will like it ? it?s just another format to throw into the ring . . .
|
| |
|
|
| TomK |
Posted on 19-12-2007 00:36
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 168
Joined: 02.12.07
|
I very much doubt that we will do best of 7's on the winner side and best of 5's on the losers. I think it would cause chaos and things would get held up. |
| |
|
|
| Sass |
Posted on 19-12-2007 02:18
|
FORUM ADDICT!
Posts: 1804
Joined: 10.09.07
|
It hasn't in my experience but it's your comp. I just think 5s is too short a distance and that was a compromise.
Maybe you're better off with a different format if you want a 64 player comp. |
| |
|
|
| TomK |
Posted on 19-12-2007 02:23
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 168
Joined: 02.12.07
|
I see what you are saying Sass. I quite like the idea of shorter matches cause it will give everyone a chance against anyone. There are more chances of upsets and it is very hard to call a winner in best of 5's. |
| |
|
|
| neo69 |
Posted on 19-12-2007 14:42
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 93
Joined: 05.11.07
|
Sass wrote:
You would have ample time to have best of 7 on the winners side, best of 5 on the losers.
this would work fine.
and double elimination is always played with the losing side playing less frames then the winning side |
| |
|
