Revolutionize Tournament Structure

D

DieselPete

Well-known member
Let's get beyond Single or Double Elimination.
Keep the tournament at 256 players to create the maximum prize pool through entry fees.
Limit the number of days the top professionals have to be on site.

I am creating rounds of play, with the top 64 (seeded players) receiving a bye through round one, so they are not on site for the first few days.

Round 1 — Involving 192 unseeded players who we can describe as locals, high amateurs, guys willing to spend a buck for experience​


  • 192 unseeded players are placed in 64 groups of 3
  • Round robin: each player plays 2 matches
  • 1 player advances from each group
  • Guarantees everyone two matches
  • If each player in a group is 1-1, the first tie breaker is games won minus games lost. If that is tied for two players, then head-to-head result breaks the tie between players with the same games won/lost differential.
  • 64 Unseeded Group Winners Advance to Round Two

So you have:


64 Seeded players now joining 64 Round 1 winners = 128 players


Round 2 — 128 players, Seeded Players are now on Site​


  • 32 groups of 4, each with two Seeded and two Unseeded players
  • Seeded Players are balanced (1 with 64, 2 with 63, 3 with 62, etc.) and joined by two Unseeded Players
  • Each group plays a round robin
  • Each player plays 3 matches
  • Only the group winner advances from each group (see below)*
  • Similar tie-breaking process as Round One
  • 32 players advance

Round 3 — Single-Elimination Bracket​


Then you can go into a traditional 32-player knockout, single-elimination tournament. Players are seeded into the bracket based on pre-tournament rankings. If player #1 gets out of his group, he is guaranteed to play the lowest seeded of the other 31 to advance. If there are several unseeded players that advance out of the second round groups (unlikely but possible), the #1 seed gets the player with the lowest Fargo rate. (In other words, the best players get the easiest path.)

Only the top 32 get paid, compressing money toward the top and making it more likely that top players can earn something of a living.

*I admit that advancing one person from the Round Two groups is debatable. It could be that two advance, making the single-elimination bracket (Round 3) a 64-player bracket, with payment to the top 64.
 
I think a lot of these dragged out schedules are because of agreements with the hotels and casinos on increased room stays as most require players to stay at the host hotels.
 
muskyed said:
I think a lot of these dragged out schedules are because of agreements with the hotels and casinos on increased room stays as most require players to stay at the host hotels.
Click to expand...
I agree. I think what I am trying to do is fill the hotel with 192 guys for a few days, then 128 for a few days, then a diminishing number thereafter. No matter what, you must have people checking out a leaving long before the tournament ends no matter what.

But yeah, there certainly are "you must stay at the host hotel to play" rules as negotiated parts of the tournament/host contract.
 
DieselPete said:
Let's get beyond Single or Double Elimination.
Keep the tournament at 256 players to create the maximum prize pool through entry fees. ...
Click to expand...
In the typical WNT event, the large majority of the prize fund is added money. The goal is to create a watchable show. To some extent, the bottom half of the entries is an annoyance. They provide only about one sixth of the prize fund, roughly double the production effort, and produce little usable video.
 
Entry fees need to trend towards zero in the long term for pool to become a mainstream and viable sport. There's no world where you can sustain competitors primarily off of other competitors.

The first round of play is basically a qualifier, which is common and what other sports do. It was tried in 2024 by Matchroom and failed simply because not enough players showed up. I think it's a good idea, but you'd need to grow pool first before you can implement that. They can barely fill up these tournaments as is.
 
Optimizing for streaming is probably not the best way to grow the game. No one is ever going to pay substantial sums to watch YouTube pool matches. Much like live music, the future should be live events and fan experience. Pool is interesting because spectators and competitors are not extremely distinct categories. The possibility of having large handicapped events, co-located with pro only events, and open tournaments is really an opportunity. Equipment demos, mini tournaments, luxury hospitality options, Pro/Am events, and corporate activations should be possible. The hard part is getting companies not directly in the pool business to take an interest.

The golf tournaments I've attended recently have had simulator golf, and putting contests sponsored by luxury credit cards and telecom companies.

That might not be the set of sponsors for pool, but the DraftKings 1000 and Under Scotch Doubles Tournament or 10-ball challenge would be cool. The Budweiser fan deck with beer specials and autograph sessions could work. Indy Car does a good job of this sort of thing too. More screens to keep up with the action, all-inclusive food and beverage hospitality tiers, and a general caring about the fans would go a long way.

You might need to require pros to do media and or fan engagement, but if they were paid better as a result, they'd likely be happy to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top