Vote on Think Pink rule changes for 2020/21
by Pink Ball » 24 Jul 2020 Read
After what I think has been a very successful first running of Think Pink, its second season, 2020/21, is around the corner, and I am thinking of introducing a few rule changes.
The vast majority of last year's format will be retained, such as:
There will continue to be NO transfer market or option to change your team after it's been selected. It would be far too complicated for me to work. I think it would take some of the charm from the competition in that it ticks over from event to event.
There will continue to be NO points awarded for invitational tournaments such as the Champion of Champions, Masters or Shanghai Masters.
All ranking events will continue to carry points WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE SHOOT OUT
Those are not up for discussion.
But I would like to run the following suggestions by you.
Proposition One: Ranking events with finals that are shorter than best of 17 should carry half points. For example, during 2019/20, this would have applied to the Riga Masters and Gibraltar Open. The reason I am proposing this change is that these events tend to attract weaker fields, and therefore the scoring is higher. This makes such events among the valuable of the season despite being among the least prestigious. I will be strongly advocating a YES vote on this.
Proposition Two: Ranking events with no matches of less than best of 11 should carry DOUBLE points. For example, during 2019/20, this would have applied to the UK Championship, the Players Championship, the International Championship and the Tour Championship, as well as the China Open if it had been held. The reason for this proposal is that these events, despite being among the most prestigious, often end up being among the lowest-scoring because of their strong fields and strong formats. Please note that if this proposition is passed, the World Championship will be worth QUADRUPLE points in 2020/21 rather than triple points in 2019/20.
I am in two minds about this rule change as I think it verges on being overcomplicated, despite making sense. I will leave you decide.
Proposition Three: In 2019/20, the first tie-break criteria was who won the most tournaments during the season. The second tie-break criteria will be world championship score. Then it goes by who has the highest scoring team member, then second highest, third highest and so on until the tie is settled.
I am proposing that we will not keep track of tournament winners next season and that the first two tie-break criteria will be scrapped. In other words, in 2020/21, the first tie-break criteria would be highest-scoring team member, then second-highest-scoring team member, and so on until the tie break is settled. I think this would make the tie-break criteria less complicated, and I am strongly advocating a YES vote.
To vote, please just copy the template below, and type in YES (meaning thi proposition should be enforced) or NO (leave it as it is) after each proposition.
Proposition One:
Proposition Two:
Proposition Three:
The vast majority of last year's format will be retained, such as:
There will continue to be NO transfer market or option to change your team after it's been selected. It would be far too complicated for me to work. I think it would take some of the charm from the competition in that it ticks over from event to event.
There will continue to be NO points awarded for invitational tournaments such as the Champion of Champions, Masters or Shanghai Masters.
All ranking events will continue to carry points WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE SHOOT OUT
Those are not up for discussion.
But I would like to run the following suggestions by you.
Proposition One: Ranking events with finals that are shorter than best of 17 should carry half points. For example, during 2019/20, this would have applied to the Riga Masters and Gibraltar Open. The reason I am proposing this change is that these events tend to attract weaker fields, and therefore the scoring is higher. This makes such events among the valuable of the season despite being among the least prestigious. I will be strongly advocating a YES vote on this.
Proposition Two: Ranking events with no matches of less than best of 11 should carry DOUBLE points. For example, during 2019/20, this would have applied to the UK Championship, the Players Championship, the International Championship and the Tour Championship, as well as the China Open if it had been held. The reason for this proposal is that these events, despite being among the most prestigious, often end up being among the lowest-scoring because of their strong fields and strong formats. Please note that if this proposition is passed, the World Championship will be worth QUADRUPLE points in 2020/21 rather than triple points in 2019/20.
I am in two minds about this rule change as I think it verges on being overcomplicated, despite making sense. I will leave you decide.
Proposition Three: In 2019/20, the first tie-break criteria was who won the most tournaments during the season. The second tie-break criteria will be world championship score. Then it goes by who has the highest scoring team member, then second highest, third highest and so on until the tie is settled.
I am proposing that we will not keep track of tournament winners next season and that the first two tie-break criteria will be scrapped. In other words, in 2020/21, the first tie-break criteria would be highest-scoring team member, then second-highest-scoring team member, and so on until the tie break is settled. I think this would make the tie-break criteria less complicated, and I am strongly advocating a YES vote.
To vote, please just copy the template below, and type in YES (meaning thi proposition should be enforced) or NO (leave it as it is) after each proposition.
Proposition One:
Proposition Two:
Proposition Three:
Last edited by Pink Ball on 26 Jul 2020, edited 1 time in total.
-
Pink Ball - Posts: 22259
- Joined: 07 April 2015
- Location: Galway city, Ireland
- Snooker Idol: You are a banker
- Walk-On: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkfgIUiCiUQ
)
