DCC and Fargorate

ShortBusRuss

Short Bus Russ - C Player
Silver Member
Just curious if DCC tournament officials have gotten their sh!t together and started reporting full scores yet, so Fargorates can be calculated off the biggest event of the year? It's the only tournament I play, and I travel from Germany to do so. It still pisses me off that I can't really move my Fargorate spending 10 fooking days playing a huge pool event.

Russ
 
Just curious if DCC tournament officials have gotten their sh!t together and started reporting full scores yet, so Fargorates can be calculated off the biggest event of the year? It's the only tournament I play, and I travel from Germany to do so. It still pisses me off that I can't really move my Fargorate spending 10 fooking days playing a huge pool event.

Russ

Maybe because it is so big it’s harder for them to keep it organized and get the results submitted? I would think the Fargo folks would be there to make sure the flagship event is used to calculate their rankings. My fargorate is zero which I think is fairly accurate.
 
Just curious if DCC tournament officials have gotten their sh!t together and started reporting full scores yet, so Fargorates can be calculated off the biggest event of the year? It's the only tournament I play, and I travel from Germany to do so. It still pisses me off that I can't really move my Fargorate spending 10 fooking days playing a huge pool event.

Russ
Have you tried contacting DCC/Diamond directly? I've had questions in the past and they've usually responded fairly quickly. You would think with the global use of Fargo that an event this big would report all scores.
 
Have you tried contacting DCC/Diamond directly? I've had questions in the past and they've usually responded fairly quickly. You would think with the global use of Fargo that an event this big would report all scores.
Maybe Diamond feels players don't want to be clocked.
 
Yeah, I strongly agree that the time has come for this, Russ. Like you, I'm surprised this hasn't happened yet. Both Lee Van Cortezza and Josh Filler played 12 races to 9 at the 2020 DCC, and that's a lot of missing data for use in Fargo calculations.
 
Have you tried contacting DCC/Diamond directly? I've had questions in the past and they've usually responded fairly quickly. You would think with the global use of Fargo that an event this big would report all scores.

People have been complaining about this for years at this point. It is a matter of the tournament handlers not wanting to do the extra work to record match scores. It is easier for them to just do won/loss tracking. As many programmer type people that we have in pool, they could probably get their tournament software modified for free to track the scores, track the rebuy status, etc. If they would just ask. But asking would make them look really bad, because it is something they should have done a long time ago.
 
People have been complaining about this for years at this point. It is a matter of the tournament handlers not wanting to do the extra work to record match scores. It is easier for them to just do won/loss tracking. As many programmer type people that we have in pool, they could probably get their tournament software modified for free to track the scores, track the rebuy status, etc. If they would just ask. But asking would make them look really bad, because it is something they should have done a long time ago.
I agree with you but its their deal and its full every year so they probably aren't too concerned. We have a very successful(20+yrs) regional tour that doesn't report. The owners are not Fargo fans(or ratings of any kind) and they always have good fields. To each their own.
 
The over under of “any” change for the better at DCC is never.

Couldn't agree less. The Derby was once banks, one pocket and nine ball only.

Then, the Straight Pool event was added and it lasted for 10 DCC classics. The 10-ball was added, now known as the Big Foot Challenge, and it is still going strong. The bank pool ring game was added, and it is still going strong. There are now three midnight mini events, one in banks, one in one pocket and one in nine ball.

Yes, although we lost the straight pool event, the Derby now offers eight different tournaments, along with the almost continual opportunity to get into action matches, and has gotten better with time.

The track record of the event organizers is a good one, and they have made the Derby much better than it used to be.
 
The event has grown, yes for sure. But the technology has not grown with it. Participating as a player, the scroll system is hit or miss, so you best be right at the screen every draw. Relying on your phone for the feed is match suicide.

As a fan watching from home, the scroll might not be updated for 3 days, so you don't even know who is left.

I haven't seen any change in the software since they came out with it about 10 years ago.

Russ's request has to do with the technology of the event. I agree with it as well. The DCC is about the only event where tons of serious, but not pro level players go to that is not a league. Many serious players wouldn't play in a league if they were paid 1MM.

With better software, scheduling, and score keeping technology, I think the events would run smoother, and be more enjoyable for both the participants and the fans.
 
The event has grown, yes for sure. But the technology has not grown with it. Participating as a player, the scroll system is hit or miss, so you best be right at the screen every draw. Relying on your phone for the feed is match suicide.

As a fan watching from home, the scroll might not be updated for 3 days, so you don't even know who is left.

I haven't seen any change in the software since they came out with it about 10 years ago.

Russ's request has to do with the technology of the event. I agree with it as well. The DCC is about the only event where tons of serious, but not pro level players go to that is not a league. Many serious players wouldn't play in a league if they were paid 1MM.

With better software, scheduling, and score keeping technology, I think the events would run smoother, and be more enjoyable for both the participants and the fans.

Agreed for sure. The event itself has improved in so many ways, but the technology has fallen short, which is why I agreed with Russ in post #5.
 
Yeah, I overreacted, my bad. The event has definitely improved over the years. My initial reaction was specifically for the technology. I wish the technology will improve one day.

And now that the economy has been very good the past 5 or 6 years, the player count has gone up every event. (Well who knows what it will be in 2021 with Corona.....). The higher player count seems to highlight any technology shortcomings. Perhaps if there was a better scheduling system, the straight pool event, for example, would still be on.
 
... Perhaps if there was a better scheduling system, ...
You can tell that the scheduling system is broken when you look at the playing area towards the end of a round and most of the tables are empty. They have plenty of tables for the number of players -- and even more -- but they have to keep every table busy every tournament hour. They don't do that.

About eight years ago I proposed a different format with buy-backs to Diamond that could keep the tables busy and give players much more accurate scheduling. Because I thought it was important, I went as far as to help set up a local tournament with the format to demonstrate it and added $1000 to the prize fund. Diamond sent out Paul Smith to see it in action. The tournament went fine with plenty of buy-backs and according to schedule.

Diamond was not interested in changing.

Pencilling it out, I think they could have a total of 1024 entries in each tournament (including buy-backs) with the current number of tables.
 
You can tell that the scheduling system is broken when you look at the playing area towards the end of a round and most of the tables are empty. They have plenty of tables for the number of players -- and even more -- but they have to keep every table busy every tournament hour. They don't do that.

About eight years ago I proposed a different format with buy-backs to Diamond that could keep the tables busy and give players much more accurate scheduling. Because I thought it was important, I went as far as to help set up a local tournament with the format to demonstrate it and added $1000 to the prize fund. Diamond sent out Paul Smith to see it in action. The tournament went fine with plenty of buy-backs and according to schedule.

Diamond was not interested in changing.

Pencilling it out, I think they could have a total of 1024 entries in each tournament (including buy-backs) with the current number of tables.

For that matter. WHY would Diamond not simply allow everyone who knows they are gonna buy back in FOR SURE, just pay for entry + buy back in the first visit to the cashier? Why make them go back to the desk for a re-buy after every tournament loss?

That is total amateur hour stuff right there.
 
Seems like AZB's own AtLarge has an incredible ability to track and record matches. Maybe Diamond should consult with him!
 
buybacks

For that matter. WHY would Diamond not simply allow everyone who knows they are gonna buy back in FOR SURE, just pay for entry + buy back in the first visit to the cashier? Why make them go back to the desk for a re-buy after every tournament loss?

That is total amateur hour stuff right there.

On two of the three years I went, I paid for my buybacks at the same time I paid for my entry. I think they may have given me 2 receipts...one for regular entry and one for buyback....but I don't remember. I think I actually had already paid for the entry online and then just paid for the buybacks when I went to desk to confirm I was there.
 
Just curious if DCC tournament officials have gotten their sh!t together and started reporting full scores yet, so Fargorates can be calculated off the biggest event of the year? It's the only tournament I play, and I travel from Germany to do so. It still pisses me off that I can't really move my Fargorate spending 10 fooking days playing a huge pool event.

Russ

I agree with you completely. My 9-7 loss to Chris Melling went in as 1-0 him lol.

For real though, they are missing the boat pretty badly (pun...considered?)

KMRUNOUT
 
You can tell that the scheduling system is broken when you look at the playing area towards the end of a round and most of the tables are empty. They have plenty of tables for the number of players -- and even more -- but they have to keep every table busy every tournament hour. They don't do that.

About eight years ago I proposed a different format with buy-backs to Diamond that could keep the tables busy and give players much more accurate scheduling. Because I thought it was important, I went as far as to help set up a local tournament with the format to demonstrate it and added $1000 to the prize fund. Diamond sent out Paul Smith to see it in action. The tournament went fine with plenty of buy-backs and according to schedule.

Diamond was not interested in changing.

Pencilling it out, I think they could have a total of 1024 entries in each tournament (including buy-backs) with the current number of tables.

Your pencil calculation shows going from about 400 players per discipline to about 1000 players per discipline in the same time and same space?! Can you market that to every tournament director nationwide? Especially the Tuesday night weekly $5 events that finish at 4AM?
 
Your pencil calculation shows going from about 400 players per discipline to about 1000 players per discipline in the same time and same space?! Can you market that to every tournament director nationwide? Especially the Tuesday night weekly $5 events that finish at 4AM?
I said 1000 entries including buybacks, which might be only 400 players since my system allows more than one buy-back per person if they keep losing matches. Or it might be 600 players with 424 buy-backs. The main point is that you can keep all of the tables busy, which maximizes the number of players who can play.

If you want to market it, feel free, but it's so simple it will be hard to charge for it. Here it is:

Run the entire event single elimination. You get buy-backs because the first phase is a bunch of what you could call mini-qualifiers -- 8-player single-elimination brackets. When a reasonable number of players have arrived, such as 16 or 24, draw them into brackets. Start them playing. Once a bracket starts, play for that bracket does not stop until it has finished (maybe with very short rest breaks). The winners of the brackets go on the "main board" which is played starting at a specified time. The losers can sign up for another qualifier. New players who show up late can sign up until all of the minis are filled or you cannot fill another one.

There are various minor details. If you only have 20-30 players usually, use groups of 4. If you have great steaming piles of players, use groups of 16.

Anyone on the main board wins money. Maybe the runner-up in a qualifier gets his money back or a free entry to another qualifier.

There are various draw-timing strategies to prevent waiting until Efren and Earl are drawn into minis.

For a two-day tournament, run qualifiers on the first day, the main board on the second.

For Derby City, the main board players for banks don't have to enter the one pocket until they have finished banks, so there is less overlap problem for each player. The one pocket can start as soon as the banks are down to the main board, since you are only using 32 of 40+ tables at that point.

I have seen one player enter five times with this format. There is no problem with that. Let him pay to play. That particular player finished 3rd-4th on the main board.

If you get knocked out from an early qualifier, you can go have lunch, nap a little, and when you are ready, you can sign up for another qualifier, if you feel like it. Or maybe try again the next day. If you get stuck on a flooded road and show up a day late, that's no problem at DCC. You can still enter a qualifier and probably get a buy-back or two if you lose your first or second match.

At DCC the qualifiers should probably be 16 and the main board 64. If the main board doesn't fill, the players who qualified first get the byes to encourage promptness. You can start main board play as soon as you have 33 qualifiers finished, if you want significant matches for the TV table.

Showing the schedule is dead simple because the groups go in order and you don't get a break once you start your group. (Groups of 16 might get an hour between the second and third rounds.) One group being slow only holds up that group. After a little experience, it's easy to predict how often groups will be starting, and you don't need everyone from a group to be present in the "on deck" area to start some from that group.
 
[...] You would think with the global use of Fargo that an event this big would report all scores.

The specially designed software is not currently configured to record match scores. There were plans last year to have them reported and recorded at the tournament desk, but those were abandoned at show time as the first-round of 9-Ball is a pretty crazy time.
 
Back
Top