I think the last minute decision is pardonable as long as it is before he takes your entry fees.
Last edited:
Changing the format just before the tournament
- Thread starter easy-e
- Start date
If your game W/L record was 30-3 and if you were complaining about your handicap, if I’m the TD, you might not be invited back.
The early chapter's annoyance was proven appropriate in the end then, no?
It doesn't always happen like that. They only had 2 chips left. When your opponent breaks everytime, teams around 1200 and above...you don't always get so lucky.
It's just the change at the door, when they knew at least the majority teams ratings beforehand.
A raw deal. If the people calculating chip counts didn't consider possibilities they certainly should have. Next time over 1300 or 1350 might only get four chips and over 1400 three chips! Never the less, you post conditions, you honor them.
Hu
Hu
The change is utter crap and that kind of decision is what gives TDs a bad name. The rules are made for a reason. Unless on the advertisement for the event that states that the TD can tweak handicaps at any point, then the change is nothing better than a 'bait and switch' maneuver.
Now with that said.... If you don't have a problem with the adjustment then whatever. I personally wouldn't have raised a stink over it. Good on you for doing the same and supporting the TD in his effort to cater to weaker players.
I know I come off a bit crass at the beginning. Truth is my region used to have incredibly popular Sunday tourneys. ~40 some odd player with a very deep and strong field. Valuable calcutta and serious bragging rights if you came away with the win. It slowly came crashing down with the owner (TD) continually penalizing the strong to shut up the weak. Not sure his line of thinking, but in the end the weak never supported the events consistently and the strong had been turned off. It's been maybe 20yrs since those days, and the area has never recovered. Doubt it ever will...
Congrats on the win
Now with that said.... If you don't have a problem with the adjustment then whatever. I personally wouldn't have raised a stink over it. Good on you for doing the same and supporting the TD in his effort to cater to weaker players.
I know I come off a bit crass at the beginning. Truth is my region used to have incredibly popular Sunday tourneys. ~40 some odd player with a very deep and strong field. Valuable calcutta and serious bragging rights if you came away with the win. It slowly came crashing down with the owner (TD) continually penalizing the strong to shut up the weak. Not sure his line of thinking, but in the end the weak never supported the events consistently and the strong had been turned off. It's been maybe 20yrs since those days, and the area has never recovered. Doubt it ever will...
Congrats on the win
Things can come up on short notice that sometimes require an experienced TD to make an on-the-spot decision, to save the integrity of the tournament. Changing an unknown player’s handicap rating in the middle of a tournament is an example. As a TD, I always make this clear to new players when they enter the tournament.
I have been on both sides, the official, and as a competitor that was screwed. My opinion, you do more to harm the integrity of your tournament by changing a handicap in the middle of a tournament unless you specifically state in the rules that you can.
I have faced an angry crowd and told them that things would be changed before the next event but rules would be followed even if they didn't like it, even if I didn't like it. The only time I would make changes in the middle of an event is if someone had snuck in under a different name. Then they would get the door, not a change in handicap.
(clipped, Hu)
I know I come off a bit crass at the beginning. Truth is my region used to have incredibly popular Sunday tourneys. ~40 some odd player with a very deep and strong field. Valuable calcutta and serious bragging rights if you came away with the win. It slowly came crashing down with the owner (TD) continually penalizing the strong to shut up the weak. Not sure his line of thinking, but in the end the weak never supported the events consistently and the strong had been turned off. It's been maybe 20yrs since those days, and the area has never recovered. Doubt it ever will...
Congrats on the win
When you have that many competitors you always have a group of malcontents that think they could win if they could just get rid of a few better competitors or change the rules a little to favor them. They don't realize that they don't have what it takes to be winners and the rules will always be the same for everybody so the changes they want there won't make them winners either. I have competed at many things and seen many events ruined by just what you are talking about, that group trying to legislate wins for themselves.
Hu
I agree completely Chris... However if there's an established system (fargo) and predetermined guidelines to how someone will be penalized (handicapped) based on the established rating, then where's the "integrity" if the TD decides to ignore what they originally said they were going to follow...?
Just playing on the other side of the fence here. Nothing more....
easy-e I think I would say well you can kick out the complainer or me. But it seems that a room full of people don't mind playing against me, so the solution would be to hand the complainer their money back and say thanks.Interested in your thoughts. Chip tournaments are pretty popular in my area. They also love scotch doubles here. A tournament was advertised for a scotch doubles chip tournament where the lower rated teams get more chips (based on your combined fargos). The higher tier was listed as “1200 and above get 5 chips”.
My partner and I get there and the TD tells us that someone already complained about us and he only allowed us to start with 4 chips. We are 1467 combined (mainly because of my partner).
I drove 45 minutes to this place to find the rules changed to suit a complainer. I don’t mind starting with 4, unless I’m expecting 5. Am I just nitpicking here?
This sounds like the "7 max in APA" discussions. A 1200 team and a 1400 team are fairly far apart in skill, that is 100 per player, which means a doubling of the game spot. 600 vs a 700 he even race is said to be 5-10. So having all teams over 1200 be the same falls into the same issues that APA has of having 7s that are 600 Fargo as well as 700 Fargo.
Like it or not, regarding our weekly handicapped tournament in which 90% of our players attend and support on a regular basis, I feel I have an obligation to “protect” our regular players from unknown new players coming in and taking their $.
For this reason, I may tend to rank newer players relatively tough, and adjust their ranking (up or down) accordingly as the tournament progresses, if I feel that is warranted. I don’t have a problem with them winning, but they’re going to have to earn it.
This is the same reason that for our break & run contest, players that do not play in our tournament regularly are only eligible to win a considerably smaller $ pot as opposed to the the frequent tournament players that have contributed $ to that break & run pot over previous weeks/months.
Last edited:
If you made the format, then changed it a minute before the tournament, I wouldn’t bother coming back. We know we’re the favorites, everyone there does. That’s why we get half as many chips as most teams. Just don’t POST one thing then change it.
As far as giving strangers a high ranking to begin with, no problem there. When coming into a competition as a stranger I volunteer to be ranked high. I can't agree with moving their handicap up and down during the event. Smacks too much of what you freely admit to, protecting your regulars.
The break and run pot I don't object to as long as it is a publicized two tier thing. That is pretty much the whole deal, no surprises when people come to compete. Then again, in over fifty years now I have never seen a room able to get 90% of their regulars to compete, you must be doing something right!
Hu
Hard to know for certain, but it seems like the TD made a command decision that was fair. You want to believe it was because of a complainer, he probably wants to believe it was to correct the handicap to accommodate pro level fargos. There's grounds to complain, but since you crushed everyone, it would be petty. It's likely they'll post an amended handicap next time.
I don’t move a player’s handicap up and down throughout the tournament. I may move it up one time or down one time (between matches) if I feel they are clearly ranked too low or too high. In most cases, the player understands and respects my decision. In the case of a very strong player, he really should tell me to rank him at the highest level as soon as he walks in the door instead of me having to figure it out.
Unknown players should be subject to that type of decision. My partner and I play these a lot and it was a near certainty we’d be there.
To clarify, I’m not saying 90% of our pool hall regulars play regularly in our weekly tournament, but rather that 90% of our weekly tournament players play fairly regularly in our weekly tournament, even though most of them I may not see until the following week’s tournament.
I agree, but I also know that four chips is probably the right number in this scenario. I am not the type to be the complainer, but I definitely let the TD know he should have thought about this when he made the announcement. The Phoenix pool scene is getting world famous for their insistence on handicapping and capping tournaments to suit the lower rated players.