| Playoffs at WSC/WPC 2017|
|Reply WSC and WPC 2017 -> General Discussion about WSC and WPC 2017||14 posts • Page 1 of 1 • 1|
|I am play-off enthusiastic and as you may have seen in Senec I would like to have even more play-offs... Team play-offs for example :) |
We had 14 rounds at the WSC and 17 rounds at the WPC. Do you think that more rounds are still needed?
I believe that competitors solving both WSC and WPC may be tired and solving individual rounds on Saturday seems to be too demanding.
From my view WSC&WPC and WPF GP are totally different competitions and online solving requires different skills. Please keep in mind the difference.
Sudoku Day Author
|I think this poll is result of wishes to make some changes at the endgame. Play-off is good way to find out who is the best solver of the year. I don't want to sound destructively, but format seen in past three years is a bit unfair. Try to compare this playoffs structure with any other team or individual competition, sport or discipline. |
The advantage at the final stage should be minimal, almost negligible (better draw at the start of the tournament, better lane, home-field advantage etc.). There is no distance, time or points advantages. Simply, this is a moment when you need to give your best.
I agree that perfect play-off system is not invented yet, but the face-to-face playoffs format from Kraljevica is much more equitable. Also, there were some dramatic scenes for the audience which was never seen again. That's the reasons why my vote goes for the playoffs. I hope this discussion will generate best solutions for the future.
|I think that playoffs are a suggestive moment of WSC/WPC, but certainly not like in Senec, where people weren't able to see what playoff solvers were writing, and all became rather boring. I would like an extended playoff, with the first 32 A-team players participant in face-to-face challenges like an ATP tennis tournament. This way, even reaching the 32nd position will become an interesting goal for WSC/WPC participants, whose number, besides, is ever increasing from year to year.|
Edited by ingmanc 2017-01-04 4:54 PM
Diagonal Vision Author
ingmanc - 2017-01-04 4:50 PM
This way, even reaching the 32nd position will become an interesting goal for WSC/WPC participants, whose number, besides, is ever increasing from year to year.
Number of official participants is rather stable (the tendancy seems even decreasing for WSC) at ~100. I don't think it would be a good idea that 1/3 of the participants can qualify for the playoffs. It has been done at WSC 2009 and even if I wasn't there, the reports I read seemed to tell that it was not a great success.
Edited by Fred76 2017-01-04 9:28 PM
|Times change, dear Fred. And a format that eight years ago was not a success could be a success nowadays. Besides, considering unofficial participants, 32 playoff finalists are a part included between 1/7 and 1/8 of all participants. Far from 1/3, isn't it?|
Edited by ingmanc 2017-01-05 4:36 PM
Edited by ingmanc 2017-01-05 4:21 PM
|I believe that Fred talked about official participants. It seems reasonable that the play-off should be for the A-team players only. |
Yes, the finals in Senec were somewhat boring. Doing the play-offs without cameras is meaningless.
|Playoffs should definitively be for official participants only. Having eventually taken part to playoffs this year I can confirm it has been extremely exciting (from my point of view) and the number of players admitted should be increased to give more players the taste of it, without the need to wait to be 50 or over. I remember in Minsk the number of players admitted to the playoffs of the WPC was 17 and the event was managed very well. However I admit that in Senec the audience was not involved enough |
There must be consistency in what we do. Playoffs were introduced to make more spectacular the event with the aim of making it more attractive for media; consequently, the playoffs should be videoed and broadcast for the audience (and potentially for TV recording/broadcasting). It will be an essential instrument for the newly appointed director of the WPF if he will have to find sponsors. I wasn't there but I was told that the format of the playoffs held in Philadelphia was the best so far.
Playoffs require different skills from the remainder of the championship. You can't choose any more,you have to solve all the puzzles you have in front, and this is why sometimes the playoffs give different results from the qualification tournement. Playoffs on flipcharts will add another variable to the more classical format used in Senec and will require even broader skills. Why not. As long as it will be spectacular.
|On behalf of the organizers, I wish to add some points to the discussion. |
For one thing, we have an evening event of a Player vs Player knockout tournament planned in order to create a spectacle and provide people with a different kind of outlet. We have a set system for this kind of event which we tried out in the offline finals of Sudoku Mahabharat last year, and it proved to be very efficient and a lot of fun for all involved. So as far as the 'fun' element goes, we're very much aware and prepared for the need to provide something extra.
The more important fact we discussed is that, right now, even going by the replies here, the WSC WPC playoffs have been and are still in a constant state of experimentation. There is still not a sure-fire system which everyone agrees on, and more importantly, which works in terms of bringing in sponsors and getting interest in the event from outsiders, which is the main purpose in our opinion. So the simple question is, should we subject the world's top solvers to an experimental process across two competitions, both the GP as well as the WSPC, while we are still without much input in terms of results from these experiments and a set plan of action to use them?
The Player vs Player knockout tournament, for instance, is much more conducive to experimentation, as a fun event, and is also more conducive to getting sponsors/public interested. It doesn't seem like it would be a big difference to a sponsor or an outsider that a video is "WSC/WPC playoff" or "an event at the WSC/WPC" and a direct knockout format which gets everyone involved will provide the full scope of the event in a way that will probably be grasped more easily by an outsider.
|Play off will be better in my opinion|
|I think the playoffs should be included if the solving could be broadcast live to an audience or if it's done on large boards/grid such as in Beijing with the final 2. If playoffs aren't used, then perhaps later rounds should be worth extra points to allow for more movement in the standings.|
WaterlooMathie - 2017-01-14 8:09 AM
Perhaps later rounds should be worth extra points to allow for more movement in the standings.
Oh no, this is not a smart idea :(
EDIT: Now I am not sure, if I understand it correctly... Did you mean harder puzzles/rounds with more points at the end of the championship or rounds where the points will be inflated (as in the last race of the F1 championship)?
Neither does make sense to me...
Edited by greenhorn 2017-01-15 5:55 AM
|Reply||14 posts • Page 1 of 1 • 1|
|Search this forum|
Printer friendly version
Best blackjack strategies https://onlineblackjack.money/strategies/.
Online casino roulette for Australian players https://aucasinosonline.com/roulette/