Kinnison wrote: I certainly don't think all the tournaments I've played in required the same amount of concentration to play, or luck, or skill'... But I also have no desire to try and categorize them.
mgconstruction wrote:I guess I should clarify what I mean by small tourneys
My smallest tourneys consist of,
1vs1 best of 3 per round
Thats 24 games in round 1, 12 games in round 2, 6 games in round 3 and 3 games in round 4. That's 45 games played in tourney and the minimum is 5 by rule.
Which means any player winning one of my small tourneys has to win at least 8 games (2 per round) when the minimum games required to play is 5. Heck the winner has to win almost double that total. So I guess what I'm saying is how can that not be considered worthy of a trophy or any less worthy I should say?
One more thing that could be limit and at the same time keep integrity in tournaments - if tournament is smaller than X number of players then organiser isn't allowed to play in its own tournament. It seems a bit harsh but.... every idea is worth to be thrown out to the wolves.
max is gr8 wrote:I think the people who run the longer tournaments as in the year long or 6-month long or 100s of games ones will generally not care about the medals. For if you cared about the medals you'd just run smaller tournaments
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests