| Q
- 29 Feb 2012
Total Posts: 497
|
(From Dan & Q)
Dear Air Hockey community, we need to talk.
We're sorry, but things are turning into a pissing contest. We, as a community, need to do *everything* in our power to encourage tournaments. The best way we can encourage tournaments is to make them important. However, we have to determine what we call a "Major tournament". We call them "Nationals" as defined by the USAA in comparison to something at the state level. A "Major" can be compared to something like the Grand Slam in professional tennis. Winning at Wimbledon doesn't automatically make you the best tennis player in the world or name you "World Champion", but winning there means something - it simply means you won at Wimbledon against some of the other best players in the world. They still seed the next tourney based on your statistical rating, not on the finish at the previous tournament. Major League Air Hockey's (MLAH) tournament is important just as any other promoter's tournament is, even those from United Air Hockey Promotions (UnAP). But, to get people to agree what a "Major" means - we can't have the results *directly* determine the seeds in the next tournament like our current ranking system which is why we were glad to see the latest EVP pass to seed with ratings and hope that result continues going forward.
We disagree that you need more players to have a meaningful tournament. We can gather up 500 kids across Illinois and call it the biggest air hockey tournament of all time, but it's not going to have the quality of play to determine "who is the best in the world". We are not trying to discredit Houston and what they have done to increase the player base in their area but to use a quote from another forum thread, "there is a difference between air hockey and Houston"
What we can't do is punish people for not showing up.. and perhaps this is root of some players' feelings about not allowing the MLAH Vegas tournament to get sanctioning. Currently in the ranking system a player's seed drops 3.5 spots for missing a tournament. We don't think we should punish anyone, for any reason. If you're hurt and can't play - it shouldn't affect you negatively. If we use the Mitic system to seed tourneys - every time you play is an opportunity to better your rating and better your seed at the next tourney. It doesn't matter if you miss - except someone has a really good chance to jump ahead of you.
(con't)
|
|
|
|
| Q
- 29 Feb 2012
Total Posts: 497
|
(con't)
So.. we have a tradition of having 2 Major tourneys a year.. and it's gotten complicated recently because the tourneys are so close together and the earlier tourney heavily determines seeding for the next Major. This is a problem. Let's still call MLAH's tourney a "Major" (or National, or whatever you want), but let's not use the ranking of this tourney to determine seeding for the next Major. Let's just give it a big multiplier (k-value) for Mitic ratings; so anyone who shows up can improve their standing by the most possible points. That's a huge incentive to make this tourney, but it doesn't punish anyone from not showing up. Let's still call it a National for the history books - that should be a pretty good encouragement for the best people to show up for this tourney.
We can't do otherwise, because it would hurt the sport we love... we need to encourage more tournaments.
-Dan & Q
|
|
|
| fractalzoom
- 29 Feb 2012
Total Posts: 201
|
Basically - let's encourage tournaments, period. If someone is going to go through the trouble of creating a tourney - I don't want to stop that person. I understand not everyone can make a tourney... for this reason - let's not punish those people (due to injury, or whatever). Make it like a Major Tennis tourney.
Let's shift emphasis not just to tournament wins, but statistical rating. Take the prize money and the pride that goes with a tourney win, but let's take out the punishment for people who can't make it. If you don't play - you can't improve your rating and you can't win a tourney. It's what other organizations do that have far higher stakes - and I don't want to discourage anyone from hosting a tourney. Sanction a tourney by the multiplier. For instance - a state tourney has a lower multiplier than a Major.
It's a simple and elegant solution to this problem. I just don't want to see this dive into a pissing contest... it's not helpful to the community overall.
|
|
|
| TheAirHockeyGuy
- 29 Feb 2012
Total Posts: 472
|
Can............worms..........open....LOL
Chris Lee
Co-Founder, CEO
Air Hockey Players Association (AHPA)
|
|
|
| travis
- 29 Feb 2012
Total Posts: 530
|
Q said: | But, to get people to agree what a "Major" means - we can't have the results *directly* determine the seeds in the next tournament like our current ranking system which is why we were glad to see the latest EVP pass to seed with ratings and hope that result continues going forward. |
I think the plan is that if there are two major tournaments in 2012 and there aren't any huge problems with the Mitic seeds the first time they're used, then they would (should) be used again for the second tournament. That would eliminate the issue of the seeds being screwed up by the tournaments being so close together.
Travis Luscombe
AirHockeyWorld.com Webmaster
http://twitter.com/air_hockey
|
|
|
|
| fractalzoom
- 29 Feb 2012
Total Posts: 201
|
travis said: Q said: | But, to get people to agree what a "Major" means - we can't have the results *directly* determine the seeds in the next tournament like our current ranking system which is why we were glad to see the latest EVP pass to seed with ratings and hope that result continues going forward. |
I think the plan is that if there are two major tournaments in 2012 and there aren't any huge problems with the Mitic seeds the first time they're used, then they would (should) be used again for the second tournament. That would eliminate the issue of the seeds being screwed up by the tournaments being so close together.
|
This is something that should be decided/put in stone soon - well before these tourneys come up.
|
|
|
| captain2man
- 29 Feb 2012
Total Posts: 42
|
Sorry to interject as I know I'm a total newbie to your community and don't know any of you personally other than Michael Rosen.
I have started "Long Island Air Hockey" - which thusfar has simply been a monthly gathering of a small group of people playing informally - an "I'll play you next" kind of thing.
We will be hosting our first actual tournament on a Friday in early April - not sure the exact date yet.
I think the webmaster here created a spot for us to enter the tourney data. The thing is - the tables that are in this venue - while certainly playable and suitable for a small tournament like the one we're doing - are NOT USAA sanctioned tables.
It would be cool if we could have - somehow - sanctioned regional tournaments but given that not every willing venue might have sanctioned tables (the guy at the place said he's been working on it - but his vendor has been slow to respond to the request....but he's aware that his tables are not sanctioned by USAA).
I would love for our tournaments - which hopefully will turn into regular monthlies - to somehow be associated with the USAA....I think people who like to compete in these types of events would be more motivated to continue participation if they knew they a part of something bigger or were striving for higher rankings within a larger framework.
I don't really know how that would all work.
My parents were tournament bridge players - and there were different levels of tournaments they participated in. They would go to nationals (which were held four times a year), there were regionals (which would be maybe monthly or bi-monthly) and then there were just the daily regular bridge club tournaments.
Everything they played was governed by the ACBL - the official governing body for bridge....but the points system would be different depending on what type of tournament they would play.
You would get "black" points for competing and placing in a bridge club tourney, "red" points for a regional and "gold" points for a national....each having different weights of course - but they still all counted for something...it was something to keep track of - and in order to reach the different steps of the ladder (master, national master, grand master, life master, etc.) - you had to have accumulated a certain number of each different type of point.
I think that type of pyramid structure would be great....not every USAA sanctioned event would HAVE to be a national tournament....why not have more localized tournaments and get people involved on that level?
I think it would be very motivating for everyone if they knew they were participating in an event that was being "counted" in some way by THEE governing body of the sport.
No matter how many people we eventually get to participate in these tourneys - the vast majority will NEVER travel to Vegas or Houston or whereever to participate in a national tournament.
Perhaps also - the USAA sanctioned tables can be widened...
|
|
|
|
| captain2man
- 29 Feb 2012
Total Posts: 42
|
| ....in order to permit tables that wouldn't be sanctioned for a USAA national event - to be allowed for more regional play in order to open up the number of possible venues.
|
|
|
|
| travis
- 29 Feb 2012
Total Posts: 530
|
| Everything they played was governed by the ACBL - the official governing body for bridge....but the points system would be different depending on what type of tournament they would play. |
I don't see any reason why it couldn't be that way. With the rating system, we have a different weight for national, state and regional tournaments. If/When we create some sanctioning guidelines for events, the national-level (higher weight) events will likely have stricter rules than a city tournament.
Travis Luscombe
AirHockeyWorld.com Webmaster
http://twitter.com/air_hockey
|
|
|
|
| fractalzoom
- 29 Feb 2012
Total Posts: 201
|
travis said: | Everything they played was governed by the ACBL - the official governing body for bridge....but the points system would be different depending on what type of tournament they would play. |
I don't see any reason why it couldn't be that way. With the rating system, we have a different weight for national, state and regional tournaments. If/When we create some sanctioning guidelines for events, the national-level (higher weight) events will likely have stricter rules than a city tournament.
|
I like this, too.
|
|
|
| tableman
- 29 Feb 2012
Total Posts: 690
|
I want to clarify how USAA uses the term "major", for Q, Dan, newbies, whoever.
Traditionally a "major" tournament has been either a Worlds/National... a State... or even a City Championship (i.e., Houston City Open). Majors can be one day or two days, and usually involve 4 of 7's, double elim.
Only a Worlds or Nationals (to determine the USAA Champion, and Rankings) needs explicit USAA sanctioning by a Board vote. State tournaments are de facto sanctioned (no vote required) as long as they follow USAA rules/procedures. If there are conflicting promoters in one state wanting to run an official State tournament, for state ranking, then and only then will USAA step in. Otherwise we leave it to the states (just like 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says. Go Ron Paul!)
So if you use the term "major", remember in USAA lingo it has a meaning. USAA-sanctioned Worlds/Nationals are the highest-level major, because they require a Board vote, determine a new Champion, and determine new Rankings.
Mark
|
|
|
| ajflanagan
- 29 Feb 2012
Total Posts: 509
|
tableman said: I want to clarify how USAA uses the term "major", for Q, Dan, newbies, whoever.
Traditionally a "major" tournament has been either a Worlds/National... a State... or even a City Championship (i.e., Houston City Open). Majors can be one day or two days, and usually involve 4 of 7's, double elim.
Only a Worlds or Nationals (to determine the USAA Champion, and Rankings) needs explicit USAA sanctioning by a Board vote. State tournaments are de facto sanctioned (no vote required) as long as they follow USAA rules/procedures. If there are conflicting promoters in one state wanting to run an official State tournament, for state ranking, then and only then will USAA step in. Otherwise we leave it to the states (just like 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says. Go Ron Paul!)
So if you use the term "major", remember in USAA lingo it has a meaning. USAA-sanctioned Worlds/Nationals are the highest-level major, because they require a Board vote, determine a new Champion, and determine new Rankings.
Mark |
I want to clarify that there is absolutely NOTHING in writing to back up these supposed clarifications.
In fact, the following is the ONLY mention of sanctioning in the written rules:
Section X
12. Sanctioning of USAA National/International Tournaments requires a majority vote of the USAA Board
|
|
|
|
| ajflanagan
- 29 Feb 2012
Total Posts: 509
|
Q said: | We disagree that you need more players to have a meaningful tournament. We can gather up 500 kids across Illinois and call it the biggest air hockey tournament of all time, but it's not going to have the quality of play to determine "who is the best in the world". We are not trying to discredit Houston and what they have done to increase the player base in their area but to use a quote from another forum thread, "there is a difference between air hockey and Houston" |
You and I have a fundamental difference in opinion on what makes a successful tournament promotion. I'm not going to say you are right or wrong, nor am I. However, the fact is I would consider a 500 player tournament filled with kids from all across Illinois a HUGE, RAVING, MAD SUCCESS.
I am in this to perpetuate the growth of Air Hockey. Our top 10% are getting old. If we didn't encourage the youth movement in Houston, there would come a day when Air Hockey dies. I can't let that happen. I know some of my compadres feel the same way. If you find fault in that, I'm sorry you feel that way.
Houston has provided a vehicle for top notch players and newbies alike to compete for several years now. Think about how great that is! An event where the best of the best can compete while the future of the sport watch, learn and grow. I don't think there is any disputing the fact that the best of the best have attended the major events in Houston. We have been a major hub for longer that I've been around the sport. Why continue to fight it? Why continue to bellyache that it would be so much better somewhere else. The grass is always greener right? Well, the grass is very green in here in Houston. The fact is, we are going to do what we feel is best for the sport and for the active player base. We always keep our top players' feelings in mind, but there is a much bigger picture to look at.
Bottom line, there is no pissing contest occurring. I assure you, with all the sincerity in my heart, UNAP is working for Air Hockey.
|
|
|
| Mike C
- 29 Feb 2012
Total Posts: 459
|
| I think that Andrew touches on some good points about the youth movement. Air hockey is not going to die. In days gone by you find air hockey tables in arcades. Today I have seen numerous air hockey tables in the Youth wings of churches, Boys Clubs and YMCA's. The kids are the future and some of the kids here can play and they are going to put a stamp on the 2012 World Championships here in Houston. I predict at least 6 kids 16 and under breaking into the top 50 and can easily see 2 or 3 break the top 30! They are hungry and practicing as hard as the masters! It's because we have an organized plan of attack and passionate mentors willing to teach and grow this sport. We should always respect where AH came from, but realize that the future is in the next generation, not the players that have occuppied the top 10 the past 15 or 20 years.
|
|
|
|
| captain2man
- 29 Feb 2012
Total Posts: 42
|
From the brief amount of time I've been aware of this world of competitive air hockey - it's fairly clear that Texas and - specifically - Houston is the major hub of competitive air hockey.
If there was a scene like Houston's in every major city - you could truly have a national network of local, regional, and national tournaments.
I don't believe there is anything unique about Houston that SHOULD make it a major hub of air hockey as compared to any other major city....other than that were devoted and motivated folk to make it happen & build it over time.
As someone who is trying to cultivate - ideally - a scene such as Houston's here on Long Island - on the outskirts of New York City - where we certainly have no population problem....I would love for one of you who have been intimately involved in that scene (or others who understand what made Houston - "Houston") - to sort of lay out a blue print to building a scene.
The sharing of ideas on how to cultivate an air hockey following and tournament scene would be immensely helpful to people such as myself trying to grow something similar.
|
|
|
|
| Q
- 01 Mar 2012
Total Posts: 497
|
ajflanagan said:
You and I have a fundamental difference in opinion on what makes a successful tournament promotion. I'm not going to say you are right or wrong, nor am I. However, the fact is I would consider a 500 player tournament filled with kids from all across Illinois a HUGE, RAVING, MAD SUCCESS. |
I think the point we (Dan and I) tried to make with the part about the 500 kid tournament wasn't clear. We would definitely consider a 500 youth participant tournament a success but rather the point we wanted to make is that attendance numbers don't necessarily mean we'll find the "best player in the world". It's along the lines of Tim's comment that he could throw a tournament in his garage and call it the Universal Championships. Growing the sport and getting the younger players involved is great, and we wanted to point out that we have nothing but props for the job Houston has done in getting the player base to grow...but just because there are X number of people at a tournament, doesn't mean the winner of it is the best player in the World (if its called the world championships).
We don't find any fault in growing the youth movement in Houston. We often discuss the progress that some of the youth players have made/are making/will make in the years to come.
Again, I think the thesis statement from our letter to the community was that we think there is some comments out there that seemed like they were discouraging particular tournaments...and we didn't want this to go on. And our proposed solution to some of the issues that perhaps are there was to shift our understanding of defining the winner of one particular tournament as the "World Champion" but rather to place importance on the tournament with the rating system and that just because I finish 2nd at a relatively lower turnout national level tournament in May, doesn't mean I'm the 2nd best player in the world. That was my tournament finish...I look at my rating to see where I stack up against the rest.
|
|
|
|
| tableman
- 01 Mar 2012
Total Posts: 690
|
ajflanagan said: tableman said: I want to clarify how USAA uses the term "major", for Q, Dan, newbies, whoever.
Traditionally a "major" tournament has been either a Worlds/National... a State... or even a City Championship (i.e., Houston City Open). Majors can be one day or two days, and usually involve 4 of 7's, double elim.
Only a Worlds or Nationals (to determine the USAA Champion, and Rankings) needs explicit USAA sanctioning by a Board vote. State tournaments are de facto sanctioned (no vote required) as long as they follow USAA rules/procedures. If there are conflicting promoters in one state wanting to run an official State tournament, for state ranking, then and only then will USAA step in. Otherwise we leave it to the states (just like 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says. Go Ron Paul!)
So if you use the term "major", remember in USAA lingo it has a meaning. USAA-sanctioned Worlds/Nationals are the highest-level major, because they require a Board vote, determine a new Champion, and determine new Rankings.
Mark |
I want to clarify that there is absolutely NOTHING in writing to back up these supposed clarifications.
In fact, the following is the ONLY mention of sanctioning in the written rules:
Section X
12. Sanctioning of USAA National/International Tournaments requires a majority vote of the USAA Board
|
There's also nothing in our rules defining what a "cut shot" is, just 30+ years of tradition and usage, just like with the term "Major".
So Andrew you are free to follow the likes of Mike Dickstein and Mike Pryor and just make up your own words for whatever you want.
Mark
|
|
|
|
| ajflanagan
- 01 Mar 2012
Total Posts: 509
|
| You lost me Mark. I have no idea what you are talking about. I have a funny feeling you don't either.
|
|
|
|
| tableman
- 01 Mar 2012
Total Posts: 690
|
ajflanagan said: | You lost me Mark. I have no idea what you are talking about. I have a funny feeling you don't either. |
Look up "common law" on Wikipedia or similar and you'll begin to understand, Grasshoppa. :)
|
|
|
| TWeissman
- 02 Mar 2012
Total Posts: 210
|
Actually Mark, when you look up "cut shot" in the Air Hockey dictionary...you see a picture of me scoring one on you...
That is followed up on the next page where "right-wall-under" is defined...ironically it is ANOTHER picture of me scoring on you...
|
|
|
|
| fractalzoom
- 02 Mar 2012
Total Posts: 201
|
| when I looked up "air hockey dictionary" in google. The first response is, uh, unexpected.
|
First |
1 |
Last
Forums Home / Tournaments and Challenges / Dear Air Hockey Community
|
