Seeding - The purpose and methodology

F

FastManners

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I have noticed some interesting seeding choices in some of the recent big events and I am curious as to what people think is the purpose behind seeding.
1. Is it to reward your regulars?
2. Set the field so higher level players don’t play each other early in a tournament?
3. a combination of 1 & 2?
4. Some other reason.

If it is to reward loyal regulars and based merely off tour points/ranking, then it rarely seems to be totally compatible with separating the stronger players.
If it is to simply to separate the stronger players, then you would think known ability (Fargo, titles etc.) would come into the equation?
Often the seeded players by tour points/rankings are adversely affected by a pure tour points/ranking seeding system, as they run into a strong player early in the tournament who is not seeded.

I am sure it is just comes down to the business model and philosophy behind each tour.

For the record, I don’t mean to be critical, as I am grateful we have such amazing pool to watch these days. I would also be absolutely clueless about how to run a tour.
I am just genuinely curious as to people’s thoughts on the subject.
 
I think the largest reason for ranking based on participation/performance is to ensure that events get top players. At three cushion, ranking is based on recent performance and the top-ranked players get travel and accommodations free. That's a large incentive to show up and make the promoters' events successful. A downside to that arrangement is that it is hard for a new player to break into the top tier.
 
Bob Jewett said:
I think the largest reason for ranking based on participation/performance is to ensure that events get top players. At three cushion, ranking is based on recent performance and the top-ranked players get travel and accommodations free. That's a large incentive to show up and make the promoters' events successful. A downside to that arrangement is that it is hard for a new player to break into the top tier.
Click to expand...
Thank you. That makes perfect sense. I would prefer exceptions to be made for known top players, but then I guess you may have to deal with disgruntled regulars.
 
While I agree with Bob, I think that, from the vantage point of both fans and event producers, it's mostly #2. A great event is one that builds to a crescendo and the best chance of that happening is if an event is seeded. Of course, seeding guarantees nothing. How many of you predicted that Szewczyk would play Tevez in the final of the World 10-ball? Nonetheless, one of a few reasons that seeding helps field quality is that players must commit themselves to regular participation in events in order to maintain the kind of seeding that gives them the best chance to be successful in their careers as professional players.

Seeding, though it may be unpopular among unseeded players, makes professional pool a better product.
 
I agree with garczar. From a business point of view, seeding makes a lot of sense. The tournament venue can charge more for matches that are later in the tournament. People are willing to pay more for the last few rounds of the tournament because they can be relatively sure of seeing some great matches, especially since the seats are often sold in advance of the tournament. For televised events such as major tennis tournaments, the promoters and TV networks can charge more for advertising during last rounds of the tournament.
 
garczar said:
In tennis its done so there's a better chance of having good players left in the later rounds. Better for the folks selling seats.
Click to expand...
I think it’s fairer along these lines too. Without seeding, one player can cruise to the final by playing a bunch of weaker players, while another player has to face off against a bunch of champions to get there. Seeding isn’t a perfect cure, but it does even things out a bit.
 
garczar said:
In tennis its done so there's a better chance of having good players left in the later rounds. Better for the folks selling seats.
Click to expand...

yea..with seeding, not only are we more likely to see the best players square off against one another, but we're more likely to see it in later rounds
 
garczar said:
In tennis its done so there's a better chance of having good players left in the later rounds. Better for the folks selling seats.
Click to expand...
Tennis is the model I personally prefer. They use a hybrid seeing system based off of ranking, form and known ability.
 
sjm said:
While I agree with Bob, I think that, from the vantage point of both fans and event producers, it's mostly #2. A great event is one that builds to a crescendo and the best chance of that happening is if an event is seeded. Of course, seeding guarantees nothing. How many of you predicted that Szewczyk would play Tevez in the final of the World 10-ball? Nonetheless, one of a few reasons that seeding helps field quality is that players must commit themselves to regular participation in events in order to maintain the kind of seeding that gives them the best chance to be successful in their careers as professional players.

Seeding, though it may be unpopular among unseeded players, makes professional pool a better product.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the great response.
I personally like seeing for pro events if it is done logically. The seeding for the Sledgehammer event was an example of where you had two of the best three players in the event seeded low, so some of the top seeds (some low level players) had a horrible dream. For example Kelly played Tkach after one round, when everyone looking at the field would have Kelly, Tkach and Fefilova, as the clear favorites for the tournament.
I don’t think that is the best setup for the seeds or non seeds. If you were not seeded in this tournament you needed to win at least 5 matches to cash, if you were in the top 16 seeds, just 1 match on the winners side. That seems like tough action for non seeds to me.
All that being said, it fits with the WPBA’s obvious business plan of stimulating participation from their loyal/regular players, so I don’t think it’s necessarily wrong, it is just at odds with producing a tournament with the best players at the business end of the tournament.
I have also seen similar seeding anomalies from Matchroom events. The US Open had quite a few unseeded “beasts” and some good, but lesser players in the seeds.
 
Watched a WPBA event about 5 years ago when they were local to me. Talk about seeding, the top 16 ranked women didn't even show up, till the lower ranked women had played for a few days to get down to the 16 left, that would then match up with the top 16. Not sure if they still do it this way now, but I was a little shocked that the top 16 basically get a buy for 2 days.
 
muskyed said:
Watched a WPBA event about 5 years ago when they were local to me. Talk about seeding, the top 16 ranked women didn't even show up, till the lower ranked women had played for a few days to get down to the 16 left, that would then match up with the top 16. Not sure if they still do it this way now, but I was a little shocked that the top 16 basically get a buy for 2 days.
Click to expand...
That’s a similar set up to the Sledgehammer tournament, I don’t necessarily disagree with it, as it basically just makes non seeds effectively play a qualifying tournament at the event. Just tough action for non seeds. They did get a good amount of players competing, which is always good to see.
 
A few years ago I played in a huge bar table event(160 players)and they said the match ups were done on the computer.
My first opponent was easy I won 5-2.
The next two were two of the best bar table players in Colorado and I lost to both.
So I had 1 win,2 losses and a bye and still placed 19th out 160,how the hell does that work?
 
measureman said:
A few years ago I played in a huge bar table event(160 players)and they said the match ups were done on the computer.
My first opponent was easy I won 5-2.
The next two were two of the best bar table players in Colorado and I lost to both.
So I had 1 win,2 losses and a bye and still placed 19th out 160,how the hell does that work?
Click to expand...
No bye?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top