sunbury2 wrote:Organising venue finals at the end of each season would quadruple my workload in that time frame
After the 9th week print off the venue leaderboard and give to the TD.
The Top 40 or 5 tables are playing in the venue finals.
Anyone else that signs up on the day play in the side event.
Winner into the Final table of the venue final.
Means someone playing in the 10th week actually has a small chance of making the state finals. All be it only by winning the venue final as probably won't have enough points as would have been in the top 40 already. Means players are also playing for points the whole season week 1-9 to try and make the top 40 of their venue.
You will be rewarding those in larger venues as they will still be fighting it out for the regional leaderboard as well as the venue. Give prizes for the top of each region.
My idea you are reducing venue qualifiers by 1, but also encouraging players in smaller regions such as ballarat, bendigo to try and compete for the regional qualification.
Maybe to sustain the larger venues have the Top 25 from that region qualify.
It is not a major overhaul as you have the region leaderboard all ready listed on the website. If you have an amended state leaderboard based on win, and placings, player in the regional areas will compete on a level playing field to those in the metro areas.
Also still roughly same number at the state finals, just a more wide spread demographical participation.
This is definitely a complete competition overhaul.
The communication, marketing and education involved in the changing of our most basic qualification methods (Top 5 from venue) would be time consuming, laborious and fraught with a major scope for dramatic failure.
And you missed my points about dedicated TD's and running venue finals in the final week.
a.) More chance of chip fraud at these events as regular NPL chips will be used.
b.) Additional staffing required at 99% of events in the final week as final events require more staffing. Especially with side tournaments to be ran.
c.) 260 venue leaderboards and qualifier lists to be generated and distributed to the correct parties - this is also a technical issue as these lists are imported into the NPL software so only qualified players can register.
d.) Logistical problems as that last week would see 65% of venue require more tables. Tables must be returned. As well as many TD's requiring additional stock to run these events.
e.) Over 10,000 players would need to be communicated to (via SMS/Email) in regards to their qualification and we only have a 12 hour time frame to do so (end of Sunday, TD's synch all results, qualifier lists generated and then SMS sent at 9am.)
f.) Communication to all venues would need to be thorough and again drawn out and laborious when we could be utilising the sales team to retain and sign new venues, sportspick also takes up a fair bit of time.
These are just some of the problems I foresee just off the top of my head.
I normally don't go this in depth but I feel I need to express why something like this is just not possible at this time.
In regards to LDB's and points dependant on placings - it is a fact of our competition that those who can play in the larger venues and more regularly will accomplish a better position (read: Metro players) but what I am trying to do is create a system that if a regional player plays exceptionally well within their region, they may not win the leaderboard but would at least have a high placing. Hence the ten game block idea.
