Two Ideas for you to ponder!!!!!

[Big Johnny69]

As I sit at the computer going over threads on this site and from visiting other sites my mind always wanders to come up with fun and innovative ideas to keep the game of golf exciting and interesting. Now that the Ryder Cup with TGN is over it's time I put forth my two most recent ideas. As usual, these are not associated with OG in any way, its just a way we as golfers can get together have some fun and play some golf.

Idea #1

Now I'll be honest, I'm stealing this idea from TGN. As you all know, LBH is getting the match play tourney set up. Over on TGN they have something similar. They actually have a singles and team match play champions. But the difference is, there is no tourney. Its an ongoing event where once they crowned a champion, that champion now has to defend against challengers as the challenges arise. I know it would be hard to set up matches, but it doesn't have to be a weekly thing. Every now and then the champion (singles) or champions (team) will defend when they can. So my suggestion is, once the match play event is over and we have a champion, that player will be responsible to defend his title against anyone that challenges them. Of course handicaps will be used.

And as for the team match play champions, perhaps at one point I'll post a thread and the first two teams to respond will battle it out, and the winners will be the tag team champions and start their title reign and defences from there.

Any interest???


Idea #2

Now here's an idea I'm pretty sure will fly with everyone here. With all this Ryder Cup talk I had the idea of having an inter-forum Ryder Cup Event. No need to go into details, it's pretty self explanatory.

Any interest?

[Ginker]

Interforum Ryder Cup would be fun.. I am too far out of town for ongoing stuff..

[davevandyk]

As I sit at the computer going over threads on this site and from visiting other sites my mind always wanders to come up with fun and innovative ideas to keep the game of golf exciting and interesting. Now that the Ryder Cup with TGN is over it's time I put forth my two most recent ideas. As usual, these are not associated with OG in any way, its just a way we as golfers can get together have some fun and play some golf.

Idea #1

Now I'll be honest, I'm stealing this idea from TGN. As you all know, LBH is getting the match play tourney set up. Over on TGN they have something similar. They actually have a singles and team match play champions. But the difference is, there is no tourney. Its an ongoing event where once they crowned a champion, that champion now has to defend against challengers as the challenges arise. I know it would be hard to set up matches, but it doesn't have to be a weekly thing. Every now and then the champion (singles) or champions (team) will defend when they can. So my suggestion is, once the match play event is over and we have a champion, that player will be responsible to defend his title against anyone that challenges them. Of course handicaps will be used.

And as for the team match play champions, perhaps at one point I'll post a thread and the first two teams to respond will battle it out, and the winners will be the tag team champions and start their title reign and defences from there.

Any interest???


Idea #2

Now here's an idea I'm pretty sure will fly with everyone here. With all this Ryder Cup talk I had the idea of having an inter-forum Ryder Cup Event. No need to go into details, it's pretty self explanatory.

Any interest?

ok... when is the inter-forum Ryder Cup event and what's the closest hotel to the course?? I am in for that for sure, would love to play in another RyderCup style event, had a blast at the first one.

[Colby]

Geoff,

I actually have software that will manage #1 for you on the web. It should be pretty easy to set up, and I think we could probably find a home for it.

[Big Johnny69]

Geoff,

I actually have software that will manage #1 for you on the web. It should be pretty easy to set up, and I think we could probably find a home for it.

That would be great Colby. We'll see what kind of interest we get on it.

[John]

I would definitely be in the #2 Geoff.

[jvincent]

Geoff, Idea #1 sounds very much like a ladder. Is that what you were thinking of?

Also interested in #2.

[Big Johnny69]

Geoff, Idea #1 sounds very much like a ladder. Is that what you were thinking of?

Also interested in #2.

No, not a ladder. Just one champion and people make challenges. The rest of the rankings under the champ is irrelevant. Someone just sends the champion a pm and puts out the challenge. The champ should reply in order of pms recieved though.

[Colby]

Geoff,

Why wouldn't you do a ladder? The software I'm thinking of does it really simply. Having someone at the top getting all the challanges isn't too much fun for everyone else. What if the leader never plays a person that may beat them, they may be accepting challenges from people they could beat all the time. There has to be a bit more stucture than just a champion.

[Kilroy]

I like the ladder idea

[jvincent]

I was thinking a ladder would be better because it would give more chances for people to play in competitive matches.

[Kilroy]

Colby, let's have a look at the ladder software. Configuration options etc.

[Nat Williams]

count me in for Both!

[Big Johnny69]

OK, how about this then:

1) Our ladder will have 32 seedings (or however many sign up for the match play tourney)

1) Once the match play is completed the winner is crowned the current OG match play champion and is ranked as the first seed on the ladder.

2) Runner Up automatically falls into the second seed position.

3) From then on down we will rank everyone on how they finished in the tourney (for instance the guys that lost in the semis will be ranked 3rd and fourth and so on) with the lower handicapped person getting the higher seeding in the ladder rankings.

4) Anyone can challenge anyone else on the ladder (even forum members that aren't on the ladder). When a match occurs, the winning player will either keep their seeding (if they were the higher ranked seed on the ladder) or jump up to the seed of the player they beat and the losing player will drop to the other player's seeding. And in the cases where the player that wins was not on the original 32 seeded ladder (based on the match play tourney) the losing player now drops off the ladder seeding and will have to work their way up again.

5) But only players in the top 10 can challenge for the title, so if you are outside the top 10 you'll have to challenge at least one player in the top ten first, and win, before you can get a shot at the title.

6) And if a challenge is made and one player can't make it to the match (unless an agreed upon re-scheduling is accepted prior to the date of the match) that player will forfeit the match and their placing on the ladder if they were the higher seeded player (this includes the champion).

How does those rules sound?????

[hoolio]

My only question is what incentive does someone in the Top 10 have for accepting a challenge from someone ranked outside the Top 10. Are you obligated to accept any challenge put your way? I'd fully expect the guy who wins to be challenged by quite a few people in the Top 10 for the victory, does he have to accept the first challenge he receives or can he wait and play someone of his choosing?

EDIT: After thinking this over, what about "Challenge Tokens" or something similar. Everyone below 16 gets two tokens and everyone above gets one to start, you can only challenge if you have one and by accepting a challenge you are given another. The two for those below the 16 ranking would make it possible for them to challenge again if they lose out on a match and can't move up the ranking. This would kind of give incentive to accept challenges, and would be able to stop people with really clear schedules from making like 3 challenges a week.

Maybe I'm wrong. There's probably a downside to this idea.

[jvincent]

My two cents.

1. Seeding the first 32 in the ladder is a good idea but ideally the ladder should take as many players as want in. Not everyone could commit to the tournament time frame.

2. All challenges should have a "N-spot up" limit. N = 8 or10 is good. You get a better sorting this way.

3. I'd prefer it if when you lose you drop down one vs swapping. Again it makes the sort "better".

[Kilroy]

It could be open to anyone who wants to challenge, newcommers would be unranked and would have to challenge someone.

I also like the "N-spot up" limit. And losing should drop only one spot.

For a ladder to work, the challenged player must accept or forfiet.

[Big Johnny69]

My two cents.

1. Seeding the first 32 in the ladder is a good idea but ideally the ladder should take as many players as want in. Not everyone could commit to the tournament time frame.

2. All challenges should have a "N-spot up" limit. N = 8 or10 is good. You get a better sorting this way.

3. I'd prefer it if when you lose you drop down one vs swapping. Again it makes the sort "better".

And my issue with #1 is how do you rank them fairly? And that's why I say use the 32 seeds as a starting point. Perhaps as people who didn't sign up for the match play start challenging people and winning, the people they beat will fall to the bottom of the ladder and we'll create more seeds from there. EX: The 15th seeded player on the ladder plays someone from off the ladder and loses. The 15th will drop to the bottom of the ladder and we'll seed them #33. At one point the ladder could get to 100 seeds or so.

Problem with #3 is its not fair to the guy below who didn't lose a match. He drops down because the guy ahead of him in the rankings lost, I don't find that fair. And if anyone plays the Slammer Tour in Ottawa this is the format they use.

[jvincent]

Just to be clear Dan, when a newcomer challenges, the ladder would "grow", correct?

One other tweak, if you lose a challenge by playing you drop one. If you lose by forfeit you swap.

[Big Johnny69]

My only question is what incentive does someone in the Top 10 have for accepting a challenge from someone ranked outside the Top 10. Are you obligated to accept any challenge put your way? I'd fully expect the guy who wins to be challenged by quite a few people in the Top 10 for the victory, does he have to accept the first challenge he receives or can he wait and play someone of his choosing?

Like Dan posted, you will have to accept the challenge or forfeit. I know this may be tough with scheduling issues for many, but there doesn't really have to be a time frame on the ladder. It will be an ongoing event and will carry over each year. And perhaps the forum match play tourney will just be a seperate entity on its own each year. We'll have our forum ladder champion and our match play tourney champion.

[jvincent]

And my issue with #1 is how do you rank them fairly? And that's why I say use the 32 seeds as a starting point. Perhaps as people who didn't sign up for the match play start challenging people and winning, the people they beat will fall to the bottom of the ladder and we'll create more seeds from there. EX: The 15th seeded player on the ladder plays someone from off the ladder and loses. The 15th will drop to the bottom of the ladder and we'll seed them #33. At one point the ladder could get to 100 seeds or so.

I think we're saying the same thing. Start with 32 and grow the ladder from there.

[Big Johnny69]

Just to be clear Dan, when a newcomer challenges, the ladder would "grow", correct?

One other tweak, if you lose a challenge by playing you drop one. If you lose by forfeit you swap.

I really just don't find that fair to the person that never played, yet falls down the rankings. If you are going to limit the amount of spots you can jump up, someone on the fringe of being able to challenge to a higher spot on the ladder drops down because the guy above him lost, that's not fair to them. They can no longer challenge to a higher spot, they now have to play an extra match to get to where they want to be. By swapping, it creates a little more of a challenge for the higher ranked player. What does it matter if they lose if they only drop one spot. Big deal. I know that won't deter me. But if I was planning on challenging for the title and someone down the ladder challenges me that would put me out of my range to challenge for the title (if we use the N spot up limit, which I'm not too crazy about) then I think I'd be a bit more focused in my match.

[Kilroy]

And my issue with #1 is how do you rank them fairly?

You could start with the rankings from the match play for initial seedings. Newcommers grow the ladder by challenging seeded players.

Problem with #3 is its not fair to the guy below who didn't lose a match. He drops down because the guy ahead of him in the rankings lost,

It would mean the ladder is growing and that person should challenge someone to stay well ranked. IMO having the challenged player trade with the winner is very punnishing.

If a challenger lost a match all would remain as it was before the match.

I think we're getting ahead of ourselves here. We may be limited in what we can set up by the options in the software. I am looking forward to seeng it. Once we get it set up, it will run itself I'd expect.

What I am describing is the way Case's Ladder for (Links computer golf) was set up when I used to play on it.It worked very well. Players who did not participate could not just sit back and maintan a rank.

[jvincent]

Depending on how big you make the challenge up limit the swap option can be unfair too.

If I have beaten 6 of the 9 guys below me and lose a single match to the 10th guy it's also unfair that I should drop down below the 6 guys I beat.

Ultimately it's no biggie. I've seen ladders run both ways. I prefer the math of the bump down option.

[Wilster]

Count me in for any of the above ideas.

[Big Johnny69]

You could start with the rankings from the match play for initial seedings. Newcommers grow the ladder by challenging seeded players. And I agree that sounds like a good a fair idea to give others that didn't enter the tourney a chance to play in the ladder format.

It would mean the ladder is growing and that person should challenge someone to stay well ranked. IMO having the challenged player trade with the winner is very punnishing. And I find it punnishing to have everyone else drop a spot if someone above them loses.

If a challenger lost a match all would remain as it was before the match. Exactly, as it should. But if the challenged player lost, its not fair to everyone below them to drop in the rankings.

I think we're getting ahead of ourselves here. We may be limited in what we can set up by the options in the software. I am looking forward to seeng it. Once we get it set up, it will run itself I'd expect.

What I am describing is the way Cases Links Lader was set up when I used to play on it.It worked very well. Players who did not participate could not just sit back and maintan a rank. And they shouldn't Dan, but we know not everyone on the ladder will be challenged at the same time. I'm sure it will play itself out properly, but you're right, we should see how the software works.

See my responses in bold.

[Big Johnny69]

Depending on how big you make the challenge up limit the swap option can be unfair too.

If I have beaten 6 of the 9 guys below me and lose a single match to the 10th guy it's also unfair that I should drop down below the 6 guys I beat.

Ultimately it's no biggie. I've seen ladders run both ways. I prefer the math of the bump down option.

I totally understand what you're saying John. But look at it this way, and this is all depending if the limit up option is used.

Say the challenge limit is ten. And the "lose your match bump down one" option is used. You're the #2 seed, you could reasonably lose 8 matches in a row and still be able to challenge for the title. I don't think that's fair to others below the former #2 seed that have been bumped down for each of the #2's losses which they now have to play one extra match to get within the ten up limit if they want to challenge for the title. With probably alot of people here not being able to play pretty much whenever they want like I can, the swap option will give them buffer zone to keep their spot on the ladder and allow them a chance to challenge higher ranked opponents when they have time to get out for a round. That's why the swap is such a good format. No one else other than the #2 seed has to face any consequences because of the #2's losses. And it gives incentive to get back your previous seeding in a rematch or a challenge to a closed ranked player of your former ranking.

[hoolio]

You should put it to a vote for the 32 guys who participate in the match play tourny as to using the Bump or Swap (vote before the matches begin though).

I still think that there should be a limit on the number of challenges one person can issue in a given period of time. Some people have more free time than others, and while the "Challenge up X" would limit the number of challenges one person would receive at any given time, someone with plenty of time could continually challenge to move up, where someone with less available time might only have time to play the challenges he's received from lower ranks and not have a chance to try to advance up the ladder. Just a thought here.

[Kilroy]

It would mean the ladder is growing and that person should challenge someone to stay well ranked. IMO having the challenged player trade with the winner is very punnishing. And I find it punnishing to have everyone else drop a spot if someone above them loses.

Perhaps once we have banied around ideas for a while, and see what the software can do we should have a poll to see how the players would want some of the various options set up and keep everyone involved.

We're not trying to start a new tour here though, it should be open to anyone who wants to challenge someone and play a match.

[Big Johnny69]

You should put it to a vote for the 32 guys who participate in the match play tourny as to using the Bump or Swap (vote before the matches begin though).

I still think that there should be a limit on the number of challenges one person can issue in a given period of time. Some people have more free time than others, and while the "Challenge up X" would limit the number of challenges one person would receive at any given time, someone with plenty of time could continually challenge to move up, where someone with less available time might only have time to play the challenges he's received from lower ranks and not have a chance to try to advance up the ladder. Just a thought here.

See my reply above buddy. In there somewhere I mention the time factor as well. Which I think lends itself better to the swap option. And with most people's time restraints with work and families, I like not having the limit rule other than the players in the top ten challenging for the title. It will lead to lots of action and excitement I think. But for someone that wants to play and can only get out a few times a month, moving up on the ladder with a limit could be tough for them, especially if they lose.