Tournament type would be some kind of open tourney.

This tourney should be held every half year.

It can be ranked or friendly it is the same. My personal opinion is that should be ranked.

If it is friendly, then some reward in ranking points should be given to players who reached semi final.
Example
semifinalists - 10 rank points each
runner up - 15 rank points
winner - 30 rank points

Would be announced 1 month before start and would be opened for registration.

As tourna points, winner will be rewarded with badge on their profile.

Game format:
9 ball Open
until quarter final - first to 7 wins
quarter and semi final - first to 9 wins
final - first to 11 wins

8 ball Open
until quarter final - first to 5 wins
quarter and semi final - first to 7 wins
final - first to 9 wins

8 ball UK Open
until quarter final - first to 5 wins
quarter and semi final - first to 7 wins
final - first to 9 wins

Straight pool Open
until quarter final - first to 2 wins
quarter and semi final - first to 3 wins
final - first to 5 wins

Let me know if it is managable and if there is interest for such tourney.

Cheers!

every half year? lol

this would have the impossible 1000 rank possible so got to disagree unless edge modification came into it.

yeah i don't think that will happen if you could win 30 rank off it

I have had an idea simmering away in my mind for a while, so I figure I should share now...

I think we should have the occasional "Grand Slam" tournament where there are high stakes to enter the tournament.

I don't know how it would fully work (which is why I havent shared the idea yet)...but I was thinking round one would be for normal ranking; then round two was double rank gain/loss (like it is in tournaments now), round three would be for triple ranking points and round four would be four times etc and keep multiplying until the final.

Quite radical, yes - but thats why you would call it something like a "Grand Slam" or "Grand Tournament" or "Major Tournament"...keep raising the stakes as the rounds go on and on.

Maybe hold something like the idea above once or twice per week during peak periods.

Sorry to put this under your thread, but this is just an expansion/alternative to the idea you posted pod

I like the concept of a large tournament every once in a while, I think every 6 months is a bit extreme though , maybe 1 every month?

Winning a badge or a medal of some sort sounds great!

The amount of games could be shortened(especially straight), some users might not be so keen on having to wait so long for other games to be completed.

I think the 30 rankings points(or any other) for winning this is not a major problem as killer already produces large amount of points depending on the game/players of course and killer is played all day every day.

yeah but what if your 970 and you win 30 points that makes the impossible rank possible.

with edge modification you might win 5-10 points per tournament and thats with every game double rank.

this works for pros and under but not virt in my view and with double rank its easier to rank up rather than harder.

True.

It depends on who has entered the tournament though(if the points were not a set amount), killer is the same - depends on who enters.

Maybe instead of winning a certain amount of points for winning/runner-up we could keep it as it is with points per game and the reward of a badge for winning?

well we have common idea of big tournament lol
so this is the right thread lol

My principal idea is to have big tournament, no metter what is the outcome - having points or just a badge.

Winning this tournament should be metter of prestige. To show who is the best in each discipline. My idea is to have world championship tourney on funkypool.

That kind of tourney (long frames) makes sure that only best player could win. When you have to win 7 (or more) frames to go through next round, it is very unlikely that you can win all frames by flukes.

So we can declare winner of that tourney the master of discipline, for that period (6 months or 1 month).

That is original idea, but it is posted to be modifyed :)

Cheers

A badge would be better as points can be lost and a badge will show the achievement.

Like I said I am fully behind this idea, would be great for a BIG tournament for each discipline to take place once in a while.


EDIT: Just thinking about time zone issues:

If this were to come in I'm sure the time of the tournament would UK members but what about for example, Australians and Americans?

Example:

If the tournament were to take place 18:00 UK time then this would mean Australians would have to make it for around 04:00 their time.

If the tournament were to take place 12:00 UK time then this would mean Americans would have to make it for around 07:00 their time.

Also vice versa on each example of course!

Edited at 13:03 Wed 16/02/11 (GMT)

You could have one every two weeks or even one per week, with rotating times...

Week 1: 8 US
Week 2: 8UK
Week 3: 9 US
Week 4: Straight

As most people appear to be from the UK, you should try to target that peak time. But you can also vary the times within that peak time to include us Aussies and Americans...so you could have one at 5pm GMT (7am East Coast Aus; 1pm West Coast USA) and others at 10pm GMT (Midday East Coast Australia and 6pm West Coast USA)...

If we varied the times within that 5-6 hour window on weekends, it could work quite well.

sounds good umpire

I think it would be very difficult to get people to sign up to a first to seven tournament, when a lot of people enter.

We will rarely get the very best playing the very best as well due to things like timezones. We still need to keep the door ajar to let the average joe have a good sniff at the tournament too.

I think things like greater risk of ranking points, marathon format and a badge for that specific tournament would make it a nice addition to the game, and many people would be keen to enter - so the best player online at that time would win.

And if you extended on my idea of one tournament per week, rotating through the different game types, you can have the potential of someone winning the "Grand Slam" of tournaments.

I like your proposal. It would be good to rotate teams. Only i think it should be at least monthly, not weekly tourney.

About other thing u mentioned, average joe still has a chance but not to win, as it is in a real life. Some quality player who plays well, with bit of luck can get even into the final but rarely wins it. And he is very happy about it :)

I am thinking of it, how hard will be to get people enter this kind of tournament, if we set up large frames, that's why i proposed to be held half yearly.

its a nice thought but im one of the few who has to disagree with this.

true m8, it is only a tought.

Whether you held it weekly, monthly or once every decade, you will find it extreamly difficult for people to enter a tournament that will commit them to their computer for several hours.

As it is, a Marathon Final that is first to 5 allows a time limit of an hour...so if we had first to seven, or even first to five in all frames; you are looking at an extreamly long tournament which is unfair in my opinion.

If you had just 16 people enter this kind of thing and all rounds were first to five, you are looking at a two and a half hour tournament at the minimum - because there is normally always one match that will go to the deciding frame, if not very close to it.

Thats why I think it should be at standard marathon length now, but raise the stakes as each round goes on.

as long as...

1) The Tournament doesn't run for more than 2-3 hours
2) The impossible 1000 rank is just that


then i can agree with this tournament.

Due to ranked tournaments all frames would have to be made ranked, im sure nick could times the multiplier for this one tournament so not a real issue.

My only concern with my idea (with multiplying the ranking win/loss) is if we had a very large tournament (which is the idea), then rankings could be a seven or eight times the normal win/loss by the final...

But in theory, the person who won the tournament would deserve it.

You would have one massive winner...but you do in the major golf tournaments, Grand Slam Tennis tournaments etc