I've taken the liberty of starting this thread because it's at the very least preferable to a minority decision (and I have a feeling that George actually prefers last year's format, which won't do if he were just to have his way ). So in the past three ACCs, we've had:
1. 1 vote per game
2. 2 votes per game
3. Tallied votes over a 24 hour period from when the OOP is released
So the main formats have all been covered in the past. The arguments for each have been tirelessly listed in the past, but it's probably really between 1 vote per game or the counting of votes over a set period of time. The former is undoubtedly more entertaining, providing for interaction within the thread and live commentary (the whole point of the contest is that's it's supposed to be fun), but the latter obviously allows more people to vote - it depends on where your priorities lie.
Yes Ducky, we know that just because this is a tennis forum it doesn't have to follow a tennis format
EDIT: If someone could correct the typo in the poll option question, that would be appreciated
Don't particularly care how the format goes; whatever democracy decides
And although I think I was the one asking for reasons in the past, this year I hardly know anyone so it will be eenie meenie miney mo .
bad bad bad idea, with posters from almost all the time zones in the world..18 people from one part of the world can end the a match or all the matches before people even wake up in other time zones.
Best-of-five definitely. Tally format killed a good portion of the fun last year. These people who complain about not having enough time to vote think their participation is more important than the contest itself. If it's so important for them to vote, why don't they just make sure they're in front of the PC by the time it starts?
Voting can start in a different time each day so no time zone will be particularly favoured.
By the way, I also suggest that a TB is worth two votes instead of one (it's a more important, longer game ).
Any format is fine with me and the 5th set if that format is the most successful, then the 5th set is advantage and the TB is worth two votes instead of one is a good suggestion.
Most important is that the first rounds be split into manageable chunks. Past experience shows we struggle to keep 32 live scores up-to-date. One of the biggest problems is that votes tend to come in thick and fast within the first hour and then too slowly afterwards.
I would recommend a slightly different approach this year, with an OOP. Schedule, say, 16 matches to start at a certain time then the next 16 two hours later. Each batch of matches will have its own thread so people won't get mixed up. Judging by previous voting patterns most matches will finish before the next batch are due to start.
With a 256 player draw (128 matches) the first round could be split into eight voting sessions. The second round into four, the third into two and the remaining rounds can be one session each.
This will also make it easier for people to give reasons for their votes, which is of course what we all want.
i thought pro surfing's 'three per heat' would be be a good way to elimate a lot of the sh!te in the early rounds with 1 seed max in each pool of three. just throwing it out there belatedly...
you guys look like you have it under control though ... ACC looks to be a fascinating event indeed... so many arse clowns out there with so little reward to show for it... it is a deserved event...
Since we're having a bigger draw this year, there will be a lot of matches where almost everyone who wants to gets to vote, because of people just randomly picking from obscure names, etc. I don't think I've ever seen a 'fixed' match in the ACC - when a win is definitive, e.g. Mirkaland triple bageling celia, it is deservedly so and doesn't require another 20 votes to confirm it, and those who didn't get to vote for her will probably have a chance to when the voting times alter as the rounds progress. In the more contentious matches, often 35-40 votes are needed, which isn't far removed from the average of around 45 votes that we were getting in last year's opening rounds.
The reasons for voting as well as the post match interviews and all the surrounding crap are really fun.
Actually, a great idea would be to (if possible) move everything ACC related to a new forum specifically for the ACC. When its in the heat of the event, there's a shitload of ACC-related threads, not just the official voting thread.
In that forum could also be a sub-forum for previous years events
The reasons for voting as well as the post match interviews and all the surrounding crap are really fun.
Actually, a great idea would be to (if possible) move everything ACC related to a new forum specifically for the ACC. When its in the heat of the event, there's a shitload of ACC-related threads, not just the official voting thread.
In that forum could also be a sub-forum for previous years events
Nice idea but I don't see it happening. The mods prefer to keep this contest as unofficial as possible. It's too un-PC and offensive for the likes of Kapranos. Who knows how many more like that are around.
I like the 12hr format or the 2 votes per game. The two more popular opinions seem to be the extremes: too much or too little time. The PYW format is great as it would allow mega clowns like NinaNina to "triple bagel" several early round opponents, but 12 hours may be the most straight forward: I had to dig through search and found a full PYW explanation only from a post circa 2006.
I don't actually mind the 'two votes per game' format, as long as 1) the rounds were split up into more manageable chunks (as per Jimnik's suggestion, giving us a chance to count the votes properly), and 2) if we were guaranteed enough voters to complete all the matches - which obviously didn't happen in '06, hence the second vote policy.
An ACC forum will never be agreed to by the mods, but advertising the contest in GM surely isn't that radical an idea, particularly if we take into account all the other irrelevant discussions that take place during the off-season. After all, many of those who spend the most time in GM hardly come in here, and they're the ones who should be voting.
but advertising the contest in GM surely isn't that radical an idea, particularly if we take into account all the other irrelevant discussions that take place during the off-season. After all, many of those who spend the most time in GM hardly come in here, and they're the ones who should be voting.
That's a good point. There's nothing worse than opening what could potentially be an awesome thread and seeing it get confined to the subforum of death
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Mens Tennis Forums
18.5M posts
87.7K members
Since 2002
A forum community dedicated to male tennis players and enthusiasts. Talk about everything from the ATP, NSMTA, to college Tennis and even everything about equipment. It's all here!