World Contest system

Smart wrote:what happens in the event of a split result

pad should get casting vote IMO

Hmm, we'll see what happens, I've voted for one of the two with six, but not the other one

I went option 2 because the bookies odds were only used because the seeding system was so out of date based on form. The seedings list now is much more current. But options 1 and 2 shouldn't be split against 3 because they are the same in principle and I doubt option 1 voters would be that fussed about using provisional seedings based on ProSnookerBlog rather than bookies odds. Having run this thing it would make the TD's job easier if it was provisional seedings over odds.

Option 3.

vodkadiet wrote:Option 3.

Sonny wrote:I went option 2 because the bookies odds were only used because the seeding system was so out of date based on form. The seedings list now is much more current. But options 1 and 2 shouldn't be split against 3 because they are the same in principle and I doubt option 1 voters would be that fussed about using provisional seedings based on ProSnookerBlog rather than bookies odds. Having run this thing it would make the TD's job easier if it was provisional seedings over odds.

Thats why I created option 2

option1 wins

GJ wrote:option1 wins

What about a coalition

right then what are we going with

the main difference between option 1 and option 2 is Ronnie.

Bookies have him 1 or 2 where as in the second system Ronnie could go down to 13th or 14th on a daily basis ranking/seeding system

Wild wrote:right then what are we going with

the main difference between option 1 and option 2 is Ronnie.

Bookies have him 1 or 2 where as in the second system Ronnie could go down to 13th or 14th on a daily basis ranking/seeding system

Well, my preference would be option two, - based on Matt updating the rankings each day

- for the first round Wild - given all 16 go together it wouldnt make a difference - only in round two - once points are being allocated.

I still have the spreadsheet that Sonny created, so either's fine.

PLtheRef wrote:

Wild wrote:right then what are we going with

the main difference between option 1 and option 2 is Ronnie.

Bookies have him 1 or 2 where as in the second system Ronnie could go down to 13th or 14th on a daily basis ranking/seeding system

Well, my preference would be option two, - based on Matt updating the rankings each day

- for the first round Wild - given all 16 go together it wouldnt make a difference - only in round two - once points are being allocated.

I still have the spreadsheet that Sonny created, so either's fine.

my preferance would be option 2 based on i know virtually sod all about bookies and never visit websites on the matter where with rankings i could work out the thing before matt does if he is not available to do it on a daily basis.

I think most people who voted 1 would go with 2

just so i get this right we will be having one template for each round ? or are we going with Daily templates so the updating rankings or odds are more relavent ? there will be no more than 5 matches starting on a particular day.

for example template for day 1 and 2 will be up as soon as then template for day 3 will be up on the morning of day 2 etc etc

i could do daily templates for you as long as your incharge of the points.

pm me your email, i'll send you what we've used

So option 1 won the vote but we're not going with it

Bourne wrote:So option 1 won the vote but we're not going with it

seen this before, ask people, have a mini discussion, then do what you think regardless of vote.....................

Well its going to be that points system, only suggesting what would be easier - hardly much change, But I'll do whatever -

option 1 and option 2 is identical just different way of working it out.

The Bookies will have Ronnie favorite despite doing Nothing at all to deserve it so in truth the Rankings is a more Honest and Fairer option now its more to current form as Sonny said

for example Ronnie v Murphy in Round 2

Option 1 8 points for a Murphy win

Option 2 6 Points for a Murphy win

any fool thats been following snooker over the past year would know option 2 is fairer and more current than the odds system.

if Ronnie hits the track running and people Back him they will get more points.

If people found predicting it so easy then no-one would ever get one wrong ...

Bourne wrote:If people found predicting it so easy then no-one would ever get one wrong ...

im easy whatever system used but it needs deciding by saturday

voting has gone for option 1.

After running the china open, I realised I would prefer having it based on lowest ranked player winning gains you more points, rather than using seeds. Because I think choosing ebdon to beat robertson deserved you more points than just seed beating a seed.

So Id prefer it based on highest rank player, lowest ranked player. But thats me obviously.

Seems that Paddy and Wild who are running this thing want option 2 and as I devised the rules in the first place I can say the bookies odds would never have been used had the current seeding system been in place 2 seasons ago. So I think option 2 out of 1 and 2.

Anyway, best settle it sooner rather than later because I want to go on the promotion drive for it.

what would points be for say

allen v stevens

because both are in top 16 provisionally ?

GJ wrote:what would points be for say

allen v stevens

because both are in top 16 provisionally ?

Well like we had favourites and underdogs? The higher ranked player would be favourite, etc.

PLtheRef wrote:

GJ wrote:what would points be for say

allen v stevens

because both are in top 16 provisionally ?

Well like we had favourites and underdogs? The higher ranked player would be favourite, etc.

cheers pad

which in that case despite being unseeded Stevens is the highest Ranked player

i think thats the only match in the draw in the first Round that works like that.

thats is were it falls down as how can you say a qualifer should be worth less points

no another is Martin Gould over Marco Fu.