Moderator: Tournament Directors

I have to agree with something like this, even though i think i would not qualify either.josko.ri wrote:I suggest to change the 15 games rule from this:
1) Players A,B,C need to have 15 or more wins together
into this:
1) Players A,B,C need to have 15 or more triples wins together
OR
2) If players A,B,C have n triples wins together (n<15), they can still qualify if:
Players A,B have (15-n) or more triples wins together
&
Players A,C have (15-n) or more triples wins together
&
Players B,C have (15-n) or more triples wins together
If all 3 players have 15+ wins in triples game among themselves, but just do not have it achieved playing as one team but rather playing as 2 of them together and a third player, that is the same value like if they played it together.
Notice, if a triples team has never played together, that means they can still qualify with rule (2) but it means the other 45 games (15 games in combination of every player) need to be achieved.
Yes! I like this system. Please consider it, organizers - because this problem will only be worse for the quads tournament. I think the 15 wins criteria as it stands now prohibits the entry of a lot of fantastic triples team players. I did some research into my own stats, and I'm not even eligible to play with the vast majority of my clan or regular team mates. I qualified with exactly 2 people, and luckily they wanted to play with me.josko.ri wrote:I suggest to change the 15 games rule from this:
1) Players A,B,C need to have 15 or more wins together
into this:
1) Players A,B,C need to have 15 or more triples wins together
OR
2) If players A,B,C have n triples wins together (n<15), they can still qualify if:
Players A,B have (15-n) or more triples wins together
&
Players A,C have (15-n) or more triples wins together
&
Players B,C have (15-n) or more triples wins together
If all 3 players have 15+ wins in triples game among themselves, but just do not have it achieved playing as one team but rather playing as 2 of them together and a third player, that is the same value like if they played it together.
Notice, if a triples team has never played together, that means they can still qualify with rule (2) but it means the other 45 games (15 games in combination of every player) need to be achieved.
Well I don't get it what you two are trying to say?Foxglove wrote:Yes! I like this system. Please consider it, organizers - because this problem will only be worse for the quads tournament. I think the 15 wins criteria as it stands now prohibits the entry of a lot of fantastic triples team players. I did some research into my own stats, and I'm not even eligible to play with the vast majority of my clan or regular team mates. I qualified with exactly 2 people, and luckily they wanted to play with me.But I do think the current requirements are overly restrictive, and I'm sure there are tons of skilled team players who want to enter but can't.
Oh. This is a problem for me too.macbone wrote:Ah, too bad. The sitter rule disqualifies my team. One of us is only allowed to have fellow clanmates sit for him, and I can only have Team CC people sit for me. We need that sitter function ASAP!
I didn't even think of this because I usually don't need my sitters to grab my turns...I wonder if this rule can be adjusted in any way...especially if the sitter is not in the tournament. Or can games be delayed if somebody is going on vacation. Just a couple thoughts as it seems like this is an issue for people in a clan who want to play with members outside their clan. I also do not have enough triple game wins with any 2 of my clan members.Foxglove wrote:Oh. This is a problem for me too.macbone wrote:Ah, too bad. The sitter rule disqualifies my team. One of us is only allowed to have fellow clanmates sit for him, and I can only have Team CC people sit for me. We need that sitter function ASAP!I need to figure it out, somehow.
I would imagine this rule disqualifies the majority of Team CC players who want to participate.

We are accepting this proposed amendment.josko.ri wrote:I suggest to change the 15 games rule from this:
1) Players A,B,C need to have 15 or more wins together
into this:
1) Players A,B,C need to have 15 or more triples wins together
OR
2) If players A,B,C have n triples wins together (n<15), they can still qualify if:
Players A,B have (15-n) or more triples wins together
&
Players A,C have (15-n) or more triples wins together
&
Players B,C have (15-n) or more triples wins together
If all 3 players have 15+ wins in triples game among themselves, but just do not have it achieved playing as one team but rather playing as 2 of them together and a third player, that is the same value like if they played it together.
Notice, if a triples team has never played together, that means they can still qualify with rule (2) but it means the other 45 games (15 games in combination of every player) need to be achieved.

As i worded it i will explain:Gilligan wrote:So let me understand that properly -
Gilligan, SuperWang, Peter Gibbons - 12 wins together.
Gilligan and Peter Gibbons have won 8 triples games without SuperWang.
Gilligan and SuperWang have won 15 triples games without Peter Gibbons.
SuperWang and Peter Gibbons have won 5 games without Gilligan.
Does this mean that we qualify? The way I see it, part in 2) means we only need 2 wins without the other player apiece.
