Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 4 members: Dj Thaniel, Fresh, TABLE SETTER 11, kotonk; 94 anonymousDiscussion: Fields and Teams - Major Tournaments
| Posted | Discussion |
| Oct. 13, 2014 softball4b Men's 70 1248 posts | Fields and Teams - Major Tournaments Everyone wants to participate in the World Masters, for obvious reason, great venue, usually good weather and the best of the best are there. One way to reduce the complaints regarding "big" tournaments is reduce the participation. Less teams can play on the best fields and get the best umpires. Now you get a dog chasing his tail. The clout any organization has with the local community is how much money does this event bring in. This is the only two weekends that is available for this tournament in Vegas. Even then you must deal with local leagues, park maintenance, local rules, the list is extensive. I have full confidence in the organization and the people within the organization do their very level best in anticipating issues and addressing them. If you play this sport long enough and come to this tournament over a number of years, you will find that your age group will play in a number of parks throughout the area. Consequently you might have the misfortune of moving up in age or division that gets a less than desirable park/officials/TD/insert issue here more than you believe your fair share. Once SSUSA determines there to be an issue, they address it. IMO - possible solution The tournaments dates can't be changed and I do not know if they can add an additional weekend in a limited basis. It appears SPA breaks its National Tournament along division lines as opposed to Age Banding. Would it be possible to split the tournament by age and division. I have friends that will not like this suggestion, only dealing with 40/50/55/60, but: Based on 2014 games 1st weekend had 46% of the games By combining all age groups AAA/AA 52.34% Major/M+ 47.66% plus womens div. Combine all age groups Major/AA 49.68%, M+/AAA 50.32% Of course this would change, but based on current trending I think this is a valid suggestion. |
| Oct. 13, 2014 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Mike, Here on paper it reads very valid, however never knowing who will show up could cause a problem. Some fields may not have many teams while others are over the play limits. Either way it is a valid thought. Split pretty much down the middle this way, if same teams show up or any changes made between then and next year, reflect same team numbers per age division it is a worthy idea. But can 'see' the wrench being ready to throw at ya. |
| Oct. 14, 2014 softball4b Men's 70 1248 posts | Does anyone have an opinion one way or another on this proposal? |
| Oct. 14, 2014 cal50 Men's 50 328 posts | Hi Mike, A problem for me in this scenario is that I play on 2 teams, a 50 and 55. If the 50's and 55's were together, I could not play in both. I would be curious how many people do play on 2 teams at the worlds. What about changing the tournaments to 2 day tournaments. Example have the 50's play Friday & Saturday and the 55's play Sunday & Monday. (or vice versa) Do similar for all age groups close in age. I would bet that many would come out early to watch the finals of the tournaments that finished on Saturday. I also would think that many more people would try to play in both where able. Maybe it would affect the Monday games for the more senior age brackets and wouldn't work though. Dave |
| Oct. 14, 2014 softball4b Men's 70 1248 posts | Been there and done that in 3 worlds. Greater good sort of scenario. I expect we are in the minority and I expect most are in the +/Major division. |
| Oct. 14, 2014 cal50 Men's 50 328 posts | What do you think of instead of a bunch of groups in a 3 day tournament to 1/2 of the groups play Friday & Saturday and the other half play Sunday and Monday? |
| Oct. 14, 2014 SSUSA Staff 3484 posts | We are looking at all options for the 2015 LVSSA/SSUSA World Masters Championships ... It's no secret that with the current restrictions imposed by local leagues, we are very close to theoretical capacity at 505 teams under the current Session structure ... We will continue to attempt a political solution to hopefully convince the entities to defer leagues for us (BLD is the only one so far, but only on one weekend), but to date "Local Leagues Rule" seems to be the operative principle ... Our initial reaction to two-day sessions is that it lacks feasibility, especially for the larger divisions ... For example, in the 50-AAA this year, the Championship game was game #138 in the bracket, plus the 62 seeding games, for a nice round number of 200 games for that division alone ... Similar problems, to a lesser degree, would have affected the 40-Major (32), 55-AAA (37), 60-AAA (33) and 50-Major (31) simply because of the game loads ... We are willing to consider anything, so thanks for the comments ... |
| Oct. 14, 2014 cal50 Men's 50 328 posts | To understand it a little better... Could (62 teams) 200 games be played in 2 days using 12 fields? On the first day of the tournament, do you plan 10 games on that day per field? I say 12 instead of 10 knowing that on the final day, the tournament needs to be finished earlier. What park has the most fields to play on? How many total games were played in Vegas this year? |
| Oct. 14, 2014 SSUSA Staff 3484 posts | In theory they probably could be played in two days using 12 fields, but here are some other factors ... • It would take six rounds of of game slots just to play the Round Robin ... 7:30 AM through 3:00 PM (two games in that last time slot ... • Assuming a reasonable seeding break, to play 10 rounds of games, that would take it to at least 5:00 PM through 9:30 PM games (ending at 11:00 PM if all was on schedule, but that would only get about 48 games in ... There would still have to be another 90 games into Day #2, and the last three have to be in single file in the bracket (3rd Place, Championship #1 and "If" game) ... It's a mathematical impossibility, and was only barely possible this year using 10 fields and three days ... The only other option would be to play continuously around the clock for about 36 hours straight to maybe get it done ... • There is one six-field complex (BLD), two 6-field pairs (Shadow Rock/Hollywood and Arroyo Grande/Dos Escuelas) and one 7-field pair (Lorenzi/Doc Romeo) ... However, there are serious economic constraints in using Lorenzi/Doc Romeo, so we prefer to NOT move a lot of teams in and out of there ... The City of Las Vegas charges all tournament promoters a • The Master Game Schedule this year had 1,713 games wedged into about 1,718 open (non-end-of-day) game slots ... |
| Oct. 14, 2014 cal50 Men's 50 328 posts | I knew that there was more involved in it, but this sure is tough. 3 weekends starting to look more viable. |
| Oct. 14, 2014 stick8 1991 posts | Cal50, congrats on your team victory! |
| Oct. 14, 2014 cal50 Men's 50 328 posts | Thanks Stick, hope to see you in May. |
| Oct. 15, 2014 joel 1975 131 posts | start tourney on Thursday and don't play over 4 games in one day per team!!!!!!!!!!!! |
| Oct. 15, 2014 DaveDowell Men's 70 4312 posts | Or .... [1] You could stay in the Winner's bracket longer; [2] We could switch to single elimination brackets; [3] start Thursday and finish the following Wednesday or so ... |
| Oct. 15, 2014 WOV08 1 posts | I'm sure this has already gone around in previous threads or years but how about not being held ransom by Vegas and move the Worlds from West Coast to Central to East Coast each year on a rotational basis. Or go back to Phoenix (not sure what the issue was there). |
| Oct. 15, 2014 jrhunch 113 posts | i love going to vegas but the logistics are brutal.i would like to see one prelim game that is basically practice with a blind draw double elimination tournament.cut the entry fee way down.if you go 2 and out there is plenty to do in vegas.i hate the 3 game guarantee setup,once a tournament starts you should never play a game that doesn't count.i would like to see the percentage of winners who have won the tournament with over 18 teams in their bracket after losing their first game while playing in extreme hit in vegas . |
| Oct. 15, 2014 txnighttrain 120 posts | Maybe it's time to look at another venue to play the SSUSA Worlds. I am sure there are cities that would love to have extra revenue coning in. I am really surprised at Las Vegas since their economy has been in trouble for awhile. |
| Oct. 15, 2014 rlspls1974 Men's 65 119 posts | How about Manassas Va. One year then Phoenix the next year? Alternating years, East / West |
| Oct. 15, 2014 softball4b Men's 70 1248 posts | Not gonna happen. SPA is South, ISA - Northeast SSUSA - West Vegas is the best city for a venue of this size West of the Mississippi. Cheapish flights in, lots of entertainment for the non softball players, and very decent weather. The best you can hope for is a redistribution of the teams based on bracket size and or LV brings more of their park online and upgraded. |
| Oct. 16, 2014 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | Don't know the weather history in Manassas VA, but I can safely say it's not as good as Vegas at the end of September! |
| Oct. 16, 2014 SSUSA Staff 3484 posts | Here's the "short list" of the principal technical, economic and social criteria that define acceptable potential venues for the World Masters Championships ... • At least 40-45 diamonds that meet tournament play specifications (we played of 42 diamonds on 13 softball complexes this year); • Ease of access by air at reasonable prices for flights; • Adequate lodging options in varying price ranges (there were over 20,000 hotel room nights in the LVSSA/SSUSA blocks this year) • Attractive non-softball entertainment and attraction options for players and accompanying travelers; • Likelihood of excellent weather in late September/early October; and • Acceptable economic incentives by the host location (Las Vegas Events offers significant sponsor support) Planning, negotiations and field acquisition/rental applications (already submitted) are already well underway for next year's World Masters Championships in Las Vegas, which will be year four of the current five-year contract ... |
| Oct. 16, 2014 TAT22 74 posts | I think there should be other venues considered, I for one would like to see Denver get the nod, we have plenty of fields and great things to do here. I think another big plus would be equal flight times for west and east coast teams. I also wouldn't mind seeing the worlds go to Texas, or back to Pheonix. I like Vegas but just would like to see a change in the future. |
| Oct. 16, 2014 Enviro-Vac Men's 65 489 posts | Vegas is a great destination spot. I do believe though that the host City should be paying SSUSA to bring the tournament to their City as the financial gains to the host City are significant...never mind charging field rentals. |
| Oct. 16, 2014 neck10 714 posts | joel that's not a bad idea for every game someone has to go to losers bracket,6 games is a lot for 60 yr olds in one day |
| Oct. 16, 2014 neck10 714 posts | when the asa &usssa got to big they split the worlds up to east & west then the top 10 out of each played later for all the marbles , its all about money so if it makes more money that's what will be done!!!!!!!!! |
| Oct. 18, 2014 17Black Men's 60 414 posts | In the "old days" we used to fly out to Vegas from Ohio and just play double elimination back in the 80's and 90's I am all for eliminating the "seeding games" and just dive directly into the tournament. At least especially if "a lot of teams" are coming. Or maybe play just ONE "seeding" game to loosen up instead of two or three???? Certainly I understand with expenses and etc. why some folks want to play more games if they are going to travel that far. But gosh, we all did double elimination "forever". As a playing "sponsor"---------entry fees between $350 and $700+ are a little out of control. I (we) pay for hotels & more, & that's our problem, not SSUSA or any other organization, I (we) choose to do that. I know inflation, and the fact I am in my 50's not my 30's anymore, the times change. But I miss paying $85 to $175 a tournament for entry fees LOL. I often ask or hear how other teams did in various tournaments. Answers like, "we went 2-3, 3-3 or 2-4, or whatever often come up LOL---------one team told me they went 2-3 at a recent tourney. What they don't tell you is they went 2-0 in meaningless seeding games, went 0-2 on Saturday in the games that count, and dropped into the triple elimination bracket and lost again to lose their 3rd. My point of this is----------if we play less games (double elimination), the tournament moves along faster------entry fees cheaper, SSUSA overall expenses cheaper, you can get around weather delays a little better & more, more, & more. On the other hand---------and I guess I am arguing with myself----------Here in the Ohio/Indiana/Michigan/Illinois area every tournament we go to, we play the same teams over and over and over again. For the love of softball, if we travel to Vegas/Florida or anywhere else it is "NICE" to just play some games against other guys---------so I do understand why playing at least 5 games (and hopefully more) is a good thing too. |
