EmptyMessage board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 1 member: SL7; 22 anonymousDiscussion: Probably a very naive question, but..
| Posted | Discussion |
| Sept. 29 southpaw Men's 70 1077 posts | please allow me to pose it anyway. would elimination of pool games prevent sandbagging and perhaps assist in eventually having 2 divisions ( A and Major), therefore hopefully leading to more teams participating. My thought: allow all 2 and out teams go to consolation tourney by noon, 2nd day of tourney. Main tourney continues on. Everyone guaranteed 3 games; most would get 4 to 5. Maybe would lead to less down time between games, reassessment of entry fees, and allow all teams to find their level of competition. Again, naive probably. Limited exposure to major tourneys. Live in the South--not as many teams to play. Just interested; love to play softball. Winning is not as important to me as simply participating. Best days behind me; those ahead growing fewer in number! |
| Sept. 29 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Southpaw: Sand bagging is the result of weak intent coupled with opportunity. This usually happens in the 'drop down' type of bracket... or in DE. Reducing the number of seeding games might not have much of an impact on sand bagging. JMO. Most teams prefer to keep the seeding games in order to 'get the kinks out' and/or to allow players more playing time. It's a good time to rest some guys... But... there has been a lot of movement toward reducing the number of seeding games down to 2. BW |
| Sept. 29 southpaw Men's 70 1077 posts | Hey Wood, thanks for your response. I guess my feelings grow out of disdain for 3 pool games. Generally, here in the South, it appears that most decisions are already made about how the divisions are to be seeded. Repetition of playing same teams? One warm-up game would seem to be sufficient. Then going into the "real" tournament would bring out the best competition in everyone. Then, less competitive teams could move to consolation tourney in order to have a chance to "win something". I know all the reasons for stretching tourneys over 3 to 4 days, subsidies, etc. But, 1 or maybe 2 games the first day or 2 with much down time is not the reason why most are there. |
| Sept. 29 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | In the M+ division, we requested (and SSWC granted) that we play 2 seeding games on Friday, with the DE starting on Sat Am and being totally done by 1pm on Sunday (+ -). We're ok with a 4 game guarantee... other divisions may prefer more guaranteed games. The problem with a single seeding game is that it doesn't allow for enough games to separate the teams for the DE draw. We played 4 seeding games once this year, which means that we played both teams twice (3 team event). This was definitely overkill in our view... the other teams seemed to agree. We are usually on a quality mission and at times we receive quantity instead. If you were looking for a good 1.2 bat and someone offered you two 98 MPH bats instead, it isn't likely that you'd be content... not totally analogous but it's in the ball park. BW |
| Sept. 29 Wes Men's 65 335 posts | Sothpaw-First those teams that sandbag are more interested in wining the tournament than playing ball. So let's go to your comment that you just want to play ball. I play on a 60's and 65 team both have good games and bad games, neither will win any tournament any time soon. Next year I'm going to find a 55 team to also play for. I just want to play ball. I would turn it around and play 4 or 5 pool games and make the tournament a single elimination. 50%-- 60% of the teams that come to a tournament will not every win a tournament. Wes |
| Sept. 29 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | This is something that does not need tinkering. 2 round robin games is plenty, even though it doesn't separate the seeding much. Don't even think about going back to starting these tournaments on Thursday! Would like to see another game for everyone on Saturday so Sunday doesn't run to late if you are out of town and have to catch a flight. |
| Sept. 30 Enviro-Vac Men's 65 489 posts | Our team would have little interest in spending the money to travel to a tournament and find out we might only play 4 games. The more games the better. The system SSUSA is currently using is fine. |
| Sept. 30 Jose #12 Men's 60 89 posts | I agree, there are many teams that know they have little chance of winning the tournament, but the ability to play 5+ games makes it worth their while from a financial as well as enjoyment standpoint. In my opinion, without the 4-5 game guaranty, you would have less teams coming to the tournaments. I would hate to see it go back to the double elimenation format. Look at the lack of teams going to non-age group tournaments. |
| Oct. 16 southpaw Men's 70 1077 posts | Hey guys, thanks for your responses. I still don't like all the pool play. 1 warm-up game, if 2 and out in DE, then go to consolation DE, everyone would still get 4 to 5 or more games. Just doesn't seem to be as intense in all the pool play. Just my opinion though, and I certainly respect yours and see your points. Thanks |
