Abandoned Tournaments

[yorkiepeter]

Too many tournaments are being abandoned by their organisers.

Shouldn't we ask permission from the tournament directors before starting a thread for a new tournament. May be to show commitment to the tournament and if you abandon tournaments without excuse then you should not be able to just do another one later and maybe the directors should limit the number of tournaments one person can organise.

[MostMackinest]

Abandoned tourneys are very disappointing. word.

[hulmey]

And what about players who dont show up for tournaments should they be banned from playing tournaments!! I just started a tournament pls see my sig and the amount of people that didnt join their games is astounding.

[Godd]

.............................. then you should not be able to just do another one later and maybe the directors should limit the number of tournaments one person can organise.

Ban them yes but do not punish others with limiting the number of tourneys a person can orginize for there are some great orginizers out there handling lots of tounements and doing a fine job

[Optimus Prime]

.............................. then you should not be able to just do another one later and maybe the directors should limit the number of tournaments one person can organise.

Ban them yes but do not punish others with limiting the number of tourneys a person can orginize for there are some great orginizers out there handling lots of tounements and doing a fine job

Yes....if I all of the sudden could only run 2 I would be VERY upset. I run 7 or 8 and have always stayed on top of them. I do agree that there is a problem at the moment with a certain group of players creating tournament after tournament only to have them go nowhere.

[Aerial Attack]

.............................. then you should not be able to just do another one later and maybe the directors should limit the number of tournaments one person can organise.

Ban them yes but do not punish others with limiting the number of tourneys a person can orginize for there are some great orginizers out there handling lots of tounements and doing a fine job

Yes....if I all of the sudden could only run 2 I would be VERY upset. I run 7 or 8 and have always stayed on top of them. I do agree that there is a problem at the moment with a certain group of players creating tournament after tournament only to have them go nowhere.

I have to agree with YorkiePeter on this. Tournament Organizer status should be tiered. Something like this:

1) New Organizer - limit to 3 tournaments until 2 have been successfully run [either completed or running for 30 days]

2) Established Organizer - less than 5 successful tournaments OR greater than a 2 to 7 ratio of abandoned/badly run tournaments to successful ones. Limit to 5 tournaments.

3) Respected Organizer - no limits

[Optimus Prime]

I think it would be better to do something like this....

1. Non-premium players: 1 tournament only at a time. Abandonment = 6 month tournament organization ban.

2. Premium Players: Unlimited tournaments. However, if you abandon a tournament it will result in a tournament organization ban for a predetermined amount of time, lets say 4 months. Each subsequent abandoned tournament would result in a further ban for escalating time periods. 2 = 6 months, 3 = 9 months, etc.

If you made it a feature that became something of a perk to the premium players I think it would help a little bit.

Another option could be that NO player, regardless of status can run more than 1 tournament until they have successfully completed one tournament to begin with. After that they can run as many as they want with a mind towards the abandonment penalties.

Of course, there would need to be a criteria for whether or not the abandonment required a penalty. For example: If someone is running 3 tournaments, all very efficiently, making sure to post updates, new games, etc, and then they have a personal problem such as losing a job and needing to find new work, so they have to leave CC for some reason, or a death in the family that requires a lot of their attention for 2 weeks, or even just personal problems at home. There should be a system in place for them to notify the Tournament Directors about the situation and then go from there.

Another idea would be to find a group of players who might not want to actually come up with a tournament idea but that would be willing to be on hand to resurrect a tournament after it is halfway done as long as they were provided with the proper information.

[Optimus Prime]

The other problem I see with your system Aerial Attack is how do you determine a respected organizer? You can't do it simply on number of tournaments completed because it would be very easy to complete 10 tournaments that are 8 players and take place over 2 weeks.

What does it mean to be a respected tournament organizer vs. established tournament organizer? Once you get into that realm you are dealing with less concrete criteria. New organizer vs. Established Organizer is a bit easier to deal with, but how do you place someone in the "Respected" category?

I can see that becoming a bit of a problem to deal with in the future. If you specialize it too much you are going to have NO tournaments whatsoever worth joining because nobody will think it is worth the effort.

Personally, I've been spending the last 2 weeks working on a "Tournament Helps & Hints" guide to post somewhere that will include easy to use record keeping systems, basic formats, tips on how to keep players active and so forth in an effort to provide and easier system for the newer players trying to run the tournaments. I hope to have it ready to go sometime in the next few weeks.

[Aerial Attack]

OPie,

I like all of your ideas.

Here is another question I have. How would player deadbeat status (abandonment) in a tournament affect tournament organizer status? If this had a negative effect, would just leaving a tournament [asking to be replaced OR finding a replacement] affect that status?

EDIT: I got fast-posted. This reply is to your ideas post, not your questions post

[Optimus Prime]

OPie,

I like all of your ideas.

Here is another question I have. How would player deadbeat status (abandonment) in a tournament affect tournament organizer status? If this had a negative effect, would just leaving a tournament [asking to be replaced OR finding a replacement] affect that status?

EDIT: I got fast-posted. This reply is to your ideas post, not your questions post

Hmmmm....interesting idea, and a valid point in my mind. I think that you would have to take into consideration a couple of things at least.

1. How many tournaments has the organizer actually run? Of those, what was his deadbeat rate, and is it possible to determine the reason for the deadbeats (Is it the organizer's fault, or the player's fault?)

2. Were the deadbeats players with a history of deadbeating to begin with? It would be unfair to dock an organizer's status because of a few players who historically deadbeat. It is not the organizer's responsiblity to research each player who signs up to determine if they will have a negative impact on the organizer's status.

3. Were the deadbeats simply incidental? I've had this happen before and I run very well respected tournaments. Sometimes a player simply winds up not having the time to keep up with the game load even though the wish that they could continue. These type of drop-outs should definitely not have an impact in my mind.

4. What types of tournaments is that particular organizer running? If they are short, quick tournaments, deadbeats are less common than if they are running long, complicated, involved tournaments, at which point, some drop-outs and deadbeats are expected.

Grading and establishing this type of a criteria would be difficult, but perhaps possible in the end. I'm not sure if the Tournament Directors would want to have to keep up with it though. That's the problem, it is not an easy statistic to track by any means.

[Aerial Attack]

*lol* I never realized the question could have that connotation. What I really meant was something more like the following:

You are running 3 tournaments
You are playing 3 unrelated tournaments.
You deadbeat/abandon 2 of the tournaments you are playing in.

How would that affect your tournament organizer status?

Should asking to be replaced/finding a replacement have a negative effect (as long as you try to wait until a replacement is found and haven't bailed on a ton of tournaments)?

*total brain fart*

If we are going to tier tournament organizers, should we tier tournament players? Status based on tournaments entered, won, left, abandoned, reserved, came in as replacement, etc.?

[Night Strike]

Tiering the tournaments would go against the spirit of the site: that everyone can play anyone else. That's why ranked games (both minimum and maximum scores) have been rejected.

As for your handbook OP, there is one stickied on here, so what all would you add to it?

[Optimus Prime]

*lol* I never realized the question could have that connotation. What I really meant was something more like the following:

You are running 3 tournaments
You are playing 3 unrelated tournaments.
You deadbeat/abandon 2 of the tournaments you are playing in.

How would that affect your tournament organizer status?

Should asking to be replaced/finding a replacement have a negative effect (as long as you try to wait until a replacement is found and haven't bailed on a ton of tournaments)?

*total brain fart*

If we are going to tier tournament organizers, should we tier tournament players? Status based on tournaments entered, won, left, abandoned, reserved, came in as replacement, etc.?

Whoops, got ahead of myself there I suppose. I wouldn't say that as a player what they do should have any impact on what they are allowed to do as a tournament organizer.

[Aerial Attack]

Tiering the tournaments would go against the spirit of the site: that everyone can play anyone else. That's why ranked games (both minimum and maximum scores) have been rejected.

I'm still for everyone being able to play against everyone else. I was just suggesting a way of keeping track of who the more active players are. Here are two scenarios I imagined:

1. If someone had left 5 tournaments in the last month, would you really want them joining yours?

2. Conversely, if someone had been reserved in 4 tournaments (but got into none) - would you want to make sure they got a spot?

I guess I envisioned more of a positive/negative feedback tournament tiering algorithm. Tournaments won didn't necessarily have to be included as a criteria - just figured it was a nice to know.

[Optimus Prime]

Tiering the tournaments would go against the spirit of the site: that everyone can play anyone else. That's why ranked games (both minimum and maximum scores) have been rejected.

As for your handbook OP, there is one stickied on here, so what all would you add to it?

As for tiering the players, I am with Night Strike, nothing even close to that should happen. The very idea of the tournaments is to allow all players to play all players.

With the organizers, I think the tiering should be nothing more than a simple "earning your stripes" system. Once they have shown they can reliably run a tournament then they keep that status forever, unless they show excessive abuse. Anyone who shows they are capable of running unlimited tournaments should be allowed to do so, and if they have problems they simply face their penalties and move on.

No tournaments should be given a higher "status" just because they are organized by a so called "respected organizer" instead of a "new organizer" all tournaments are treated the same, it's only the number a respective organizer can run that is different.

[Optimus Prime]

As for your handbook OP, there is one stickied on here, so what all would you add to it?

The handbook that is stickied to the top of the Forum is simply for instructions on how to post a new tournament and fill it up with players. Then it explains how to get your tournament privileges.

As for mine, I'm hoping to create a group of documents, help sheets and tips that the new organizers can go to and find the "tools" they need for actually running the tournaments. I know there must be many of the new organizers who wish they could have a system for keeping track of who wins which game and which passwords they have for each game and so forth.

I also want to include detailed instructions on how to create and post updated standings and rankings for different tournament formats, and some information on how to more efficient get players in a tournament to join games with the least amount of confusion.

Basically, the current handbook by Steelhorse, gets you started and on your way, I am hoping to create a way for those that get moving to keep moving and make it easier to run a tournament. I feel that this will help with the current problem that has cropped up with tournament being abandoned.

[Optimus Prime]

I know that the new "Rivals" system that we will be getting sometime in the future will help with record keeping in tournaments, but from what I can find on the Rivals website it will not include support for all of the different formats that are popular here at Conquer Club.

That's the reason I felt creating this "tools" section would be of help because none of us have any idea when we will actually be getting the Rivals software and the official Conquer Club sponsored tournaments.

[Aerial Attack]

OPie,

I think you missed this - seeing as how you fast-posted me again.

I'm still for everyone being able to play against everyone else. I was just suggesting a way of keeping track of who the more active players are. Here are two scenarios I imagined:

1. If someone had left 5 tournaments in the last month, would you really want them joining yours?

2. Conversely, if someone had been reserved in 4 tournaments (but got into none) - would you want to make sure they got a spot?

I guess I envisioned more of a positive/negative feedback tournament tiering algorithm. Tournaments won didn't necessarily have to be included as a criteria - just figured it was a nice to know.

EDIT: Do you mind the fact that I address you as OPie? Would you prefer OP, Optimus, Prime, Optimus Prime, or ThatTransFormersGuy?

[Optimus Prime]

What about a system something like this:

ROOKIE TOURNAMENT ORGANIZER: (No previously run tournaments)

Non-premium: Limit of 1 tournament
Premium: Limit of 1-3 tournaments

SOPHOMORE TOURNAMENT ORGANIZER: (At least 1 successfully completed tournament)

Non-premium: Limit of 1-3 tournaments
Premium: Limit of 1-5 tournaments

JUNIOR TOURNAMENT ORGANIZER: (At least 3 successfully completed tournaments)

Non-premium: Limit of 1-4 tournaments
Premium: Limit of 1-7 tournaments

SENIOR TOURNAMENT ORGANIZER: (7 or more successfully completed tournaments)

Non-premium: unlimited tournaments
Premium: unlimited tournaments


ABANDONED TOURNAMENT PENALTIES(These will need some serious discussion)

Non-premium:

First Offense: 6 weeks new tournament ban.
Second Offense: 8 week new tournament ban.
Third Offense and further: 10 week new tournament ban for each successive abandoned tournament.

Premium:

First Offense: 6 week new tournament ban.
Second Offense: 10 week new tournament ban.
Third Offense and further: 12 week new tournament ban for each successive abandoned tournament.

[Optimus Prime]

OPie,

I think you missed this - seeing as how you fast-posted me again.

I'm still for everyone being able to play against everyone else. I was just suggesting a way of keeping track of who the more active players are. Here are two scenarios I imagined:

1. If someone had left 5 tournaments in the last month, would you really want them joining yours?

2. Conversely, if someone had been reserved in 4 tournaments (but got into none) - would you want to make sure they got a spot?

I guess I envisioned more of a positive/negative feedback tournament tiering algorithm. Tournaments won didn't necessarily have to be included as a criteria - just figured it was a nice to know.

EDIT: Do you mind the fact that I address you as OPie? Would you prefer OP, Optimus, Prime, Optimus Prime, or ThatTransFormersGuy?

Yep, I have a feeling I'm gonna be fastposting a lot today. I've been waiting for someone to bring this topic up.

I think that if someone has been a reserve in multiple tournaments and never actually made it there isn't much to do than to simply try to let them know that you've got a new tournament opening up. I do that with some of mine. I have also had at least 30 folks send me PMs wanting me to notify them when my next tournaments are open. I think that is something that comes down to each tournament organizers preference. Some want to go to that extra effort, some don't.

In regards, to folks leaving tournaments, perhaps there could be a system where if folks start noticing a certain player isn't showing up, the other tournament organizers could be notified. It might just be that the player has something come up (example: Kahless), or it could be that they are deadbeating. In regards to letting them into a tournament, that is the organizers choice. They all reserve the right to exclude some players and include others. A feedback system might be tough to include though...I wonder.

[Optimus Prime]

You can call me whatever you want, Aerial Attack, I've gone by all of those at some point.

[Night Strike]

Since we're discussing tournaments, where is your signature web link OP?

[Optimus Prime]

Since we're discussing tournaments, where is your signature web link OP?

Revamping the site and reworking the dates of the upcoming tournaments, so I took it down for a week or so.

Janiv and I were trying to do some things to make it more user friendly and screwed it up big time, so I'm doing it a little differently.

[turtle32]

ABANDONED TOURNAMENT PENALTIES(These will need some serious discussion)

Non-premium:

First Offense: 6 weeks new tournament ban.
Second Offense: 8 week new tournament ban.
Third Offense and further: 10 week new tournament ban for each successive abandoned tournament.

Premium:

First Offense: 6 week new tournament ban.
Second Offense: 10 week new tournament ban.
Third Offense and further: 12 week new tournament ban for each successive abandoned tournament.

why would premium get hit harder than non?

[Optimus Prime]

It's basically just to show two different options, not necessarily to use and a different system between premium and non-premium.