My rant: Finals shouldn't be played at 1AM on a multi-day event

Swighey said:
Things like shot clocks and winner breaks are not solutions to scheduling
Click to expand...
Correct, they are not solutions for bad scheduling. But they will speed up the matches freeing up tables sooner for the next matches. If you don't agree, then try watching some matches on Youtube with Justin Bergman, Tyler Styer, Ralf Souquet, and Dennis Orcullo (just to name a few) without a shot clock being utilized as opposed to those same players in matches where a shot clock is utilized. The difference many times is 30 minutes or more.

That said, I haven't been to or played in too many tournaments that have ever had good organization. Limiting the number of entrants would be a good start. Have a deadline to enter, then use the Fargo ratings to give the better players their best chance to enter by letting the better players have carte blanche. It would separate the wheat from the chaff and make for a better (and tougher) tournament. In other words, if the entrant field was 256, then let the top 256 Fargo rated players have first crack at entering. Give them a specified time period to enter. After that time period elapses, then go to a waiting list to fill the field.

Just an idea off the top of my head.

Maniac
 
It’s a hard job to keep things moving like we fans want. The buy backs are a scheduling nightmare but also a large source of revenue, so it’s easy to understand why it’s utilized. Plus a lot of the buy back money is dead money, which is necessary for any tourney to have a good payout.

With that being said, the organizers can do a perfect job of scheduling and then Pinegar hits them with a 4.5 hour match and the shit hits the fan. The solution isn’t simple. Bob J. may have an answer but it will also have to pass the pudding test.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Swighey said:
Things like shot clocks and winner breaks are not solutions to scheduling
Click to expand...
I watched an 8-ball match (alternating break) once between SVB and Josh Roberts where the ONLY mistake in the match was Josh scratching on a break. If that match had of been a winner break match, then SVB would have won 9-0 and it would have been over twice as fast.

That's just one example.....there are many others.

Remember when Kaci beat Alex P. with an 8-pack in a 10-ball match. How fast was that match over with? Just sayin'.

Maniac (every little bit helps)
 
Maniac said:
I watched an 8-ball match (alternating break) once between SVB and Josh Roberts where the ONLY mistake in the match was Josh scratching on a break. If that match had of been a winner break match, then SVB would have won 9-0 and it would have been over twice as fast.

That's just one example.....there are many others.

Remember when Kaci beat Alex P. with an 8-pack in a 10-ball match. How fast was that match over with? Just sayin'.

Maniac (every little bit helps)
Click to expand...
Correct of course. Tennis matches would also be over a lot faster if it were winnner serves. Tennis tournaments are scheduled based on the format. Likewise, alternate breaks pool tournaments should be scheduled differently to winner breaks formats. There is certainly an argument for winner breaks in terms of getting things done quickly but it shouldn't be used as a solution to a tournament that has an alternate break format.

On a side note, I hear lots of voices calling for "longer races" and "winner breaks" almost in the same sentence.
 
buckshotshoey said:
None of you would have liked playing in "Sleepless in Sandusky! Scotch doubles started at 6pm Thursday, then when finished, team matches started. 24 hours a day pool from Thursday to Sunday!
Click to expand...
Yep. I don't know how you all do it. I see how tired you all are when you walk past my booth. More power to ya.
 
Scratch85 said:
It’s a hard job to keep things moving like we fans want. The buy backs are a scheduling nightmare but also a large source of revenue, so it’s easy to understand why it’s utilized. Plus a lot of the buy back money is dead money, which is necessary for any tourney to have a good payout.

With that being said, the organizers can do a perfect job of scheduling and then Pinegar hits them with a 4.5 hour match and the shit hits the fan. The solution isn’t simple. Bob J. may have an answer but it will also have to pass the pudding test.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
A lot of truth here. From what I heard, the All around is funded by the buy backs. Plus if you get to round 5, you get paid. This tournament has the deepest payout than any other if I had to guess. No way of having a shot clock on every table unless you have an attendant at every table, but that takes people and money to pay those people. The one pocket is what always holds this event up. Until they limit players in the one pocket, limit the race, or someone track long matches, it will always be the same.
 
Tin Man said:
What it starts with is the commitment to prioritize running a well executed schedule.
Click to expand...
Not much happens until people are committed to it. But a little commitment and prioritization things get fixed. It's a very solvable problem and it's frustrating that people aren't trying to fix it.

The weekly weeknight tournaments aren't the easiest to fit in my schedule. If you go deep in the tournament you could be there till 11 or later. At least with those they have an excuse, people have to get off work and eat before they play, I you get sleep the night before you can probably tolerate the late evening.
 
BRussell said:
Yes, most of my local/regional tournaments are like this. And the finalists almost never actually play because they just want to go home. I assume it’s mostly just lack of planning: Too many players, not enough tables, races too long, not starting on time, etc.

I like to play in round robin tournaments. It wouldn’t work for pro tournaments like Derby City (though Matchroom’s Premier league thing has a round robin format), but just what I like to play in. I kinda hate the uncertainty of elimination formats - you could be out and home by noon, or playing until 2 AM. With a round robin format you’re going to play a fixed number of matches, and so you're going to be home at a more predictable time.
Click to expand...
The round robin is nice because even if you're not very good you still get to play a few games. I thought about playing in the one pocket tournament a couple of weeks ago but $20 entry for single elimination race to 2 isn't a good deal. I'd be better off paying someone $20 to play me for an hour.
 
My wife is an avid volleyball player and I think they have the best tournaments. My favorite one she plays limits entries and they start Saturday morning with round robin. They get done around 6 pm then everyone shows up at a local bar and they release the brackets for the following day and everyone mingles and hangs out. Sunday morning starts the bracket and the finals is usually done around 5-6 pm. I am a big fan of that tournament.

I have volunteered a few times to help run tournaments and I have to say that getting pool players to the table and playing their match in a timely manner is like herding cats, well I think it is worse. I feel like I might have a chance while herding cats.
 
Tin Man said:
Finals at 1AM is not fair to the players. It is not fair to the spectators. The promoters/tournament directors are 100% responsible and it should not be socially accepted by the pool community. ...
Click to expand...
I agree, and have previously bewailed the late finishing hours at pro tournaments and challenge matches. If changes in format or field size are necessary to keep the hours reasonable for everyone involved, then it should certainly be done.

4 of the last 8 DCC 9-Ball events have finished after midnight (and one of them just a minute before midnight). Two of them ran until about 3:15 in the morning. So, to me, only 3 of the last 8 finished at a reasonable hour. How much evidence do the "powers that be" need before something significant is done to guarantee earlier finishes?
 
Swighey said:
It's a pity that a tournament with such a high status is run so poorly. Things like shot clocks and winner breaks are not solutions to scheduling (there are other arguments for them but televised snooker tournaments work just fine without them). The solution is actually thinking about the schedule when you, um schedule it. It's the first and last job of the organizer.
Click to expand...
With buy-back-in how can this be scheduled right though?
 
pw98 said:
With buy-back-in how can this be scheduled right though?
Click to expand...
I'm sure it can be. If you are buying back you must somehow be buying into an available slot in the bracket. A logically structured bracket is the key to any format.
 
Bob Jewett said:
Chess clock. Simple. No extra staff needed.
Click to expand...
I like the simplicity of that, but am not sure how best to make it work.

A race to nine that ends up at 9-0 is 81 shots, but it could end at 9-8, or 153 shots. And maybe two or three safety shots per rack on average?

30 seconds per shot say, and maybe one minute to rack?

One rack is then about 5.5 minutes including the rack time.

A race to nine has to have an allocated time of about 50 minutes per person. Ranges a minimum of about 50 minutes, to a maximum of about 100 minutes or more.

Does that save any time?
 
Last edited:
We don’t need ‘solutions’. We need commitment.

Look, it’s just not that complicated. Suppose I told the tournament director that if the tournament finished before midnight I’d pay them $1,000,000. But that if it went past midnight he’d be executed. Do you think the tournament would run late? I’m confident they could solve the problem I’d they made it a priority.

This is not a question of ability, it is a question of motivation. It’s somehow become normalized to have 2am finishes.

People talk about the growth of our game and compare us to other sports. Have you ever seen a golf tournament finish at 2am? A baseball game? Do you see how ridiculous that sounds?

No excuses. “Getting pool players tot heir matches is like herding cats.” Ok. BUDGET FOR THAT. If it takes 10 extra minutes from the time a match is called to when it’s played, that’s reality. You either have to accept that and build it in to your timelines, or you have to fight that fight and enact consequences for slow starts. What you don’t get to do is act surprised every single time it happens, shrug, fail in your job to deliver a good player experience, and then blame the players for doing what you knew they would do.

That is a major lack of accountability. As a tournament director your job is to run things so the event is successful regardless of how some of the individuals in it behave. If your success is dependent on a bunch of pool players you will fail. If it is dependent on you and you run it right you will succeed.

Trust me, it’s possible. There are a number of well run tournaments and they are a breath of fresh air. I am at the spot in my life where I’m not going to accept or support anything less.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top