Agree/Disagree, we need everyone's opinion to make 3C tournaments better...

Quess what everyone! I have just won a Parlay bet with the Lakers tonight...yeah...:smile:

3RAILKICK,

Within a radius of 5 miles, you will find many rooms:

Thanh Tam Billilards in Westminster- 8 tables plus 2 recently = 10
Games played: pool, straight rail and 3c.
Newly Samonis Clothes changed last week.
Special 6 Dollars per hour only, and no one can beat that...

Phi Hung Billiards - 3 tables
Games played: pool, straight rail and 3c.

Saigon Billiards in Garden grove- 3 tables
only straight rail and 3c play

Santa Ana - 8 verhoeven tables
pool and 3c play

New one opened up with 10 new verhoeven tables, but i doubt that they will close soon cuz of tough competitions you know...

Maywood has 14 Verhoeven, that is where Los Amigos like to play...

Adios
 
I think a inclusive points system from top to bottom, from start to finish would deter the concerns listed in the OP. Make every point count and every game count. Points could then determine the payouts and future entry fees.

I do not know much about 3C just think that a points system is logical thing to install in these concerns are that important. IMO

TY for reading my quick analysis, zilla.:cool:
 
The Carom room is getting louder with this tournament format topic….

3KUSHN, I think that you’re actually missing something. You can start off with a round robin and don’t have to finish with a round robin. I’m going to get some example so that we can see the picture better ok….

Assuming that the USBA keeps the traditional round robin qualification with 6-8 players, here are some examples:

-18 players total, 6 per group so you have 3 groups, top 2 advance = 6 players in finals. Then 3 per group round robin again so you have two group. The final is top player of group one vs. top player of group two…

-28 players total, 7 per group, top 2 advance so you have 4 groups = 8 players in finals. Then 4 per group round robin again so you have two group. The final is top player of group one vs. top player of group two…

I think you got the picture now…

I see it all the time that the USBA have a round robin of 6-8 players in the Finals…My friends! It’s a ridiculous, weird format for the final.

The USBA can find a suitable format depending on number of players enter and other factors as well. It’s pretty easy, not that complicated.

The game of 3C is unique because it’s such a beautiful game and so much fun, but the tournament format should be somewhat Universal and not unique so that if you were to apply this format to other cue sport, it’d be acceptable by the players.

3kushn said:
In my opinion any format should be designed to allow the best player in the tournament to rise to the top in the end. In most cases a Round Robin accomplishes this.
Click to expand...

I see the point that you’re trying to say and yes some people think the same way like that but let me explain so you will see that SOMETHING IS MISSING there:
-When you start off with a round robin, you have already allowed the best player to advance to the finals.
-Then you can have another round robin (a smaller group of 3/4 players as I suggested above), this you again allow the best player to get first place in the group.
-From there, he has to play a final match with the first place of the other group for the championship. He has to earn the final match all by himself.

-You don’t want to help the best player win the championship by playing a long round robin of 8 players in the finals. The best player is a better player, even with a single match of 30 points, he should win it (at least he has a better chance of winning than his opponent), so let him earn what he wants in the final match.

I hope i explained well so everyone understand it better…
 
Gentlemen,

I Totally agree with Mr 3cushion for ever!

I disagree with any round robin format tournament!

USBA Is worried about players that travel 10000000 miles and play couple of games, well .... in every world cup (a lot of players don't even shoot 10 inning in the whole tour)

Very effective way to make 3 cushion a sport! double elimination ,no handicap , short games , put pressure on the top players and give more chance for the average player.....(750 AND ABOVE)

Taking 3 cushion more serious , GIVE THE GAME AN IMAGE,


MAKE IT INTERESTING FOR THE PUBLIC, BE PROFESSIONAL, NO CELL PHONE IN THE TOUR WHILE YOU ARE PLAYING.......NO LOUD MUSIC WHILE PLAYERS ARE SHOOTING...............PROVIDE REFEREE FOR EACH GAME .....



AFTER DOING THE ABOVE ,

YOU CAN INVITE A SPONSOR FOR ANY TOUR AND ASK FOR MONEY.......

......YOU CAN SHOW IT ON TV.............YOU CAN BRING IT UP TO SCHOOLS..............

MAY BE I AM DREAMING ,,,,,,,BUT THIS IS THE WAY I SEE IT.......



GOOD LUCK.............
 
3c4ever said:
The Carom room is getting louder with this tournament format topic….

3KUSHN, I think that you’re actually missing something. You can start off with a round robin and don’t have to finish with a round robin. I’m going to get some example so that we can see the picture better ok….

Assuming that the USBA keeps the traditional round robin qualification with 6-8 players, here are some examples:

-18 players total, 6 per group so you have 3 groups, top 2 advance = 6 players in finals. Then 3 per group round robin again so you have two group. The final is top player of group one vs. top player of group two…

-28 players total, 7 per group, top 2 advance so you have 4 groups = 8 players in finals. Then 4 per group round robin again so you have two group. The final is top player of group one vs. top player of group two…

I think you got the picture now…

I see it all the time that the USBA have a round robin of 6-8 players in the Finals…My friends! It’s a ridiculous, weird format for the final.

The USBA can find a suitable format depending on number of players enter and other factors as well. It’s pretty easy, not that complicated.

The game of 3C is unique because it’s such a beautiful game and so much fun, but the tournament format should be somewhat Universal and not unique so that if you were to apply this format to other cue sport, it’d be acceptable by the players.



I see the point that you’re trying to say and yes some people think the same way like that but let me explain so you will see that SOMETHING IS MISSING there:
-When you start off with a round robin, you have already allowed the best player to advance to the finals.
-Then you can have another round robin (a smaller group of 3/4 players as I suggested above), this you again allow the best player to get first place in the group.
-From there, he has to play a final match with the first place of the other group for the championship. He has to earn the final match all by himself.

-You don’t want to help the best player win the championship by playing a long round robin of 8 players in the finals. The best player is a better player, even with a single match of 30 points, he should win it (at least he has a better chance of winning than his opponent), so let him earn what he wants in the final match.

I hope i explained well so everyone understand it better…
Click to expand...
Like I said before I'm not against different formats. I'm a little concerned about the turnout of out of town players with a single or even double elimination tourney.

I agree that the current format does in most cased drag on and should probably be modified at least at the local level.

The way you lay out the Round Robin with the final 2 top players looks good. I was confused with what you were saying.

As far as helping a top player win, that's not what I intend. What I was meaning is we probably wouldn't want all the current National Champs grouped in 1 flight and the rest in the other flights. The desire would be the best 2 players of a tourney play for the crown. That likely couldn't happen in this extreme example.

But I'm not forgetting there are unknowns/non tournament players out there that play at a high level. How many involved in this game ever heard of Jae Hyung Cho before he became the 2010 Champ?

Lastly, I think its an unfair comparison looking at our formats and the rest of the World and commenting on how much play time we expect vs how much they might get. Remember, for the most part, the rest of the World Class Players are Professionals with Sponsors. Its their JOB to compete wherever they are sent. Our 2 top players are the only ones that get any financial help and that's only for International Competition and their only sponsor is the USBA.
 
Something simple and to the point with some extra playing time and no favortism is all that is needed.that way a TD can run
a tournament heartlessly.listen to some crying,but still shrug them off and not bend or show weakness because of player favortism.
players like rules of a tournament that never changes.they might not like them and try to get you to change them.but they will still
come and play and keep complaining.but you cant weaken when they cry.offer your prize money and how it will be spread around.if you
offer a first place prize of 400 and only one player shows up. give him the dam 400 and tell him thanks for coming.if your format is fair
and the players like it your tournament will grow. a good tournament base works large and small.

3C players feel the same about their game as pool players do.sooner or later they want to take a shot at the better players.just get
out of the house and rub elbows with the boys.the tournament format has to be able to allow this.good players should not be partitioned
off from the lesser players.that is a big no no,when you are after growth.you want a C player to get run over by a champion.that is a part
of the tournament expierance.when he goes home he can say ,guess who killed me.with the better players they will work their way to the top.

I believe a good 3C format should be modeled something like this to show the flow of format.

lets say we go for a 32 player field.now you will run a double double elimanation format.

start the tournament like any double elim tourny.
25 point rounds.

first the players are posted by luck of the draw.no seeding.you get what you get.
shoot them down to 16 places.8 in the winners and 8 in the loosers.these players will now make up div A.

the 16 players that got knocked out are now div B.
rerack div B and they play double elim for a trophy and their entry back and be the B champion.
15 point rounds.


rerack the A div and they play double elim for the big prize and trophy.payout four spots.
30 point rounds.
finals are 20 point shootout.get it over.if the player from the looser side gets a quick win do it again.


this way the lesser players get 4 rounds of play in under tourny conditions.the better move on as they should.a 50 entry fee goes a long way
like this.players can afford to take a shot and the better players got something to shoot at.the boys get to rub elbows.


thanks for listening.
bill
 
3kushn said:
Lastly, I think its an unfair comparison looking at our formats and the rest of the World and commenting on how much play time we expect vs how much they might get. Remember, for the most part, the rest of the World Class Players are Professionals with Sponsors. Its their JOB to compete wherever they are sent. Our 2 top players are the only ones that get any financial help and that's only for International Competition and their only sponsor is the USBA.
Click to expand...


I just used it as an example, if The great players, players that can run 6 or 10 or easy, can play short 15 point matches, round of three and be ok with it, is there any way to justfiy C players playing long round robins, and final matches 20 points? Dick Jaspers can run 15 in a single run, but C players need to make 20? How long will that take?
 
Fox said:
Gentlemen,

I Totally agree with Mr 3cushion for ever!

I disagree with any round robin format tournament!

USBA Is worried about players that travel 10000000 miles and play couple of games, well .... in every world cup (a lot of players don't even shoot 10 inning in the whole tour)

Very effective way to make 3 cushion a sport! double elimination ,no handicap , short games , put pressure on the top players and give more chance for the average player.....(750 AND ABOVE)

Taking 3 cushion more serious , GIVE THE GAME AN IMAGE,


MAKE IT INTERESTING FOR THE PUBLIC, BE PROFESSIONAL, NO CELL PHONE IN THE TOUR WHILE YOU ARE PLAYING.......NO LOUD MUSIC WHILE PLAYERS ARE SHOOTING...............PROVIDE REFEREE FOR EACH GAME .....



AFTER DOING THE ABOVE ,

YOU CAN INVITE A SPONSOR FOR ANY TOUR AND ASK FOR MONEY.......

......YOU CAN SHOW IT ON TV.............YOU CAN BRING IT UP TO SCHOOLS..............

MAY BE I AM DREAMING ,,,,,,,BUT THIS IS THE WAY I SEE IT.......



GOOD LUCK.............
Click to expand...


Yes "MAKE IT INTERESTING FOR THE PUBLIC"
I suggest - start with round robin , first round only.
- Then single elimination format.
- play total offense > choose either cue ball each inning.
The public wants to see billiards made - also total offense will speed
up tournaments.

I am going to sponsor a tournament with this format at Hard Times Billiards in Bellflower CA. Hard Times now has 6 3C tables.
 
Last edited:
onepocket1 said:
Yes "MAKE IT INTERESTING FOR THE PUBLIC"
I suggest - start with round robin , first round only.
- Then single elimination format.
- play total offense > choose either cue ball each inning.
The public wants to see billiards made - also total offense will speed
up tournaments.

I am going to sponsor a tournament with this format at Hard Times Billiards in Bellflower CA. Hard Times now has 6 3C tables.
Click to expand...

That's interesting. Especially total offense. Before anybody complains about changing the game, I believe Hoppe made his high run ever in that format. They had the same issues back then, too, too long.
I like that format - round robin early, everybody has good play time the first day, you can prove yourself, and then if you're out, you're out, no sitting around idly the rest of the time, the survivors play, then spectators start watching, every game counts, every winner goes on to the next.
Let us know how it goes, I think people will like it.
 
Hi Everyone,

3KUSHN,
I get your point and maybe seeding players base on averages, W/L, etc. might help to avoid top players playing in the same group.

GILBERT,
This one is for you, DOUBLE ELIMINATION IS THE BEST FORMAT FOR THE TOURNAMENT, in a sense of competition.
The problem is that in some USBA tournaments, there are not enough players to play in this format.

ONEPOCKET1,
Round robin only for first round sounds good, let me know when you have the tournament ok.

Here is a Quote to consider:

“What are the advantages of a Round Robin tournament versus a Single or Double Elimination Bracket Tournament?
Round robin allows a guaranteed number of games and luck does not play as big a factor as an elimination tournament.

What are the disadvantages of a Round Robin tournament versus a Single or Double Elimination Bracket Tournament?
The round robin tournament is not as exciting, for the most part there is no championship final match. The matches in the later half of the tournament could have no impact on the final outcome of the tournament. One team may not be in the running for the championship, so therefore may not give as much effort.”

As we discussed previously that there are reasons to have the Qualification with a round robin, and one of those reasons is good playing time for everyone. Well, there were no reasons as to why we should have the Round Robin for the Finals!

I know that this topic had everyone think harder and hopefully you all had some good time reading it.

So here is my question for Everyone and EZE123, maybe the last question in this long thread :)

Will the USBA make the change in the format? If so, then how and when?



Thanks for reading everyone…
 
I think I already said it, but I think round robin has to stay in for the first rounds of a tournament.

maybe move to elim format at end, but i doubt i would play in any dbl. elim only formats for USBA events
 
I stated earlier that I prefer the round robin format for prelims. For the finals, i really don't care, but it does seem like a single or double elimination would be more exciting for finals, than the current setup. On a sidenote, I would like to say that I don't care for the practice of seeding players into particular flights. I think that ALL player placement in round robin flights, should be completely random. Where you land is where you land....
 
I'm not by any means against round robins, it's just the current format drags on too long, especially at lower levels. Maybe it's just smaller groups, maybe play to less points. I can see the point the first day, there's alot of players to winnow out. If the first day is long, that's ok, that's where you need to play to keep yourself in, figure it'll be a long day. It's just the second day and on where things drag and it's tough to tell who's winning, and too many games and points...So maybe day one is RR, then move to double elim or something like that. You never know how anything is going to work until you do it. I'd like to see the usba try a couple experiment tournaments based on this discussion. If it doesn't work, you can always go back. I don't think making the tourneys easier for people to play in without taking time off, playing until they're red-eyed, making the finals actually interesting to watch, expanding the pool of players, etc etc can possibly be bad for the game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top