- View Single Post - Grand Slam Tennis Draw Game on MTF

View Single Post
post #11 of (permalink) Old 12-03-2012, 04:33 PM Thread Starter
country flag Pratik
Pratik's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 17,914
Re: Grand Slam Tennis Draw Game on MTF

Originally Posted by Featherer View Post
Very similar, yes.
But PYW was located in the games section (of MTF) despite being rather a voting or just a diversion.
It would better be resident in Non-Tennis (or Off-topic).
It would need just one thread per tournament there and being held only occasionally (during the GrandSlams for instance).
Furthermore, with PYW voters were not allowed to post the ongoing scores (livescores), which made it quite boring, I think.
Completely agree, except the one thread per tournament part. That may become a bit too much.

After learning a bit about PYW and on the basis of my assessments in the other post I think a game with like the following set of rules would be worth giving a try at least:
(It's just a blueprint!)

1.) each vote = one game (also the tiebreak); for example: 6-5 or 6-6 or 7-6(set)

This voting game relies to an extent on the fairness and also on the awareness of it's participants.
2.) You don't have to vote for all of the simultaneously held matches,
but either way you are only allowed to vote once in one hour! (waiting-rule)
3.) It can happen that while somebody is writing their voting-post somebody else votes in the interim.
Therefore, before you vote please always check the last three voting-posts for a correct continous scoreline!
If for example somebody voted 6:4 (coming from 5:4) for player A and the one after them voted the same (6:4), then please regard it as being 6:4 1:0 for player A when posting your own votes. If the one after them voted 5:5 then you should realize the correct score being 6:5 actually.
4.) And look out for people violating the one-hour-waiting rule!
5.) And after you posted your votes please look out for somebody who posted in the interim and if so please edit your own post to adjust it to the correct scoreline.
6.) But never ever delete your voting-posts!!
...I'm afraid this possibility is the biggest problem, albeit rather unlikely maybe. If it happens the organzier could disqualify posters and issue a "black list".
7.) Incorrect votes further back then seven votes have to be regarded correct in any case.
8.) Read post #1 before starting new matches on your own!

...Yes, that were some lines of text to read for new participants and not all of them will do so. On the other hand there hopefully (for the matter) will be people who play this game more often and who correct the mistakes of the others. This mix may work.

for the organizer(s):
-Only a single thread is needed per tournament.
-organizer = post #1 (co-organizer = post #2 ...if possible)
-In post #1 the organizer publishes the schedule/sequence of "packs" of simultaneous matches (or points to post #2).
-A new pack of matches starts automatically as soon as one has completely ended, unless the organizer sais otherwise / gives a starting time in post #1 (or #2) !
-packs of simultaneous matches:
. -four matches during the first three rounds
. -two matches in round four
. -only a single match from the QF onwards
-Scoring format:
. -round one and two: best-of-three (= 12 votes to victory at minimum)
. -round three and four: best-of-five (= 18 votes)
. -QF and SF: best-of-seven (= 24 votes)
. -Final: best-of-nine (= 30 votes)
. ->The scoring format for the ongoing round should be displayed in the thread title as well, as a reminder for everybody.

...Depending on the participation (has to be tested out) the scoring format can be adjusted.
I think I am going to organize this for AO. Any helpers are welcome.
Hopefully, we will get adequate participation. If not, it can be called off mid-way.
Based on the 16() votes we got, having the game for all 128 players would probably be the best.

Featherer, I agree with all your points except 7. Not so sure about that.
A one hour voting gap would be enough. Most people found the 3 hour gap in the seed elimination too long.
Allowing all posters to post live scores is very important, even essential. It reduces the work on the organizer a lot, and it will be more fun for the participants.

There should be a fixed max. time duration for each of the early rounds/packs. At the end for unfinished matches, whoever is ahead wins. The winner of a tie in this situation is the player who reached the tied situation first.

. -round one and two: best-of-three (= 12 votes to victory at minimum)
. -round three and four: best-of-five (= 18 votes)
. -QF and SF: best-of-seven (= 24 votes)
. -Final: best-of-nine (= 30 votes)
We could make it a little smaller, for better participation.
I had something like this in mind(wanted each round to be bigger than the previous):
First round: One set. TB set:First to 6/7 wins. 1 vote=1 game.
Second round: One set. Non TB set:First to 6 with a difference of 2 wins. 1 vote=1 game.
Third round: One super set(like super TB in doubles). First to 10 with a difference to 2 wins. 1 vote=1 game.
Fourth round: Best of 3 sets. First to 6/7 wins a set. 1 vote=1 game
QF: Best of 5 sets. TB sets. 1 vote=1 game.
SF: Best of 5 sets. Non TB sets. 1 vote=1 game
F(Save the best for last): Best of 3 sets. TB sets. 1 vote=1 point. Gives a long drawn out final.

The smaller initial round gives the possibilities of early upsets, and thus, makes the game more interesting.

As of now, my major issue with this is that different rules for each round may make many posters not participate.
Pratik is offline  
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome