2011/12 Rules/Guidelines

[jim tufts]

Yeah. Own'd.

[Daniel Mack]

Bingo! Head to Head is the only tie breaker, if that doesn't apply, then it's up to the captains to decide. If they can't agree on something, then you play for it.

Thanks for the reply Todd.

So when you say play for it, you mean like both teams meet up and play each other in a tiebreaker match to decide who gets the right to pick the location of Finals? Nice. So who decides where this takes place?

Wait, I know, let's play for it. The team from Connecticut in conjuction with the team from Maine shall meet up.... and play each other to decide who gets the right to pick the location of the tiebreaker match to decide who gets the right to pick the location of Finals. Sounds solid to me, I'm glad it's worked out. So it's settled then. Let me ask you something, how do you all feel about frilly toothpicks? I'm FOR EM!

[Daniel Mack]

Wait a minute, I just thought of a problem. Wait.... dangit. lost it.

[Jason Toothy]

I'm sure we could agree on a course roughly equal distance between Tolland and Scarborough where we could play it off

[Steven Dakai]

I'm sure we could agree on a course roughly equal distance between Tolland and Scarborough where we could play it off

What a great idea!

[Daniel Mack]

I have a better idea. How about you guys just defer to us seeing that

a) You choose to be from Maine and live 700 miles away from everything.

b) The other 11 teams are not from Maine and in fact, don't even reside in a state that borders Maine.

c) You're the new guys.

I could go on but seriously though, it's not like your in NH or VT, your in freakin Maine. Aren't you guys used to driving? We're spoiled, lazy Tri-State area snobs, let's get real. No one is driving to VT to meet you half way for a playoff.

[Chris Martin]

This question has been answered a half dozen times. Who is running this thing anyways?

[Pete Violet]

This question has been answered a half dozen times. How about our tiebreaker dilemma? Who is running this thing anyways?

Todd is the commish.

Tiebreaker dilemma? There are still two months of competition!

Maybe its all in jest - but I think this "your from Maine and the farthest away so .. you should bend over backwards for the rest of us" is lame. They are part of the league like anyone else - doesn't matter that they are new this year or far away.

If it comes to a tie ... meet at Borderland / Pye / devens / Amesbury / etc and face off. Easy.

[Jason Toothy]

I have a better idea. How about you guys just defer to us seeing that

a) You choose to be from Maine and live 700 miles away from everything.

b) The other 11 teams are not from Maine and in fact, don't even reside in a state that borders Maine.

c) You're the new guys.

I could go on but seriously though, it's not like your in NH or VT, your in freakin Maine. Aren't you guys used to driving? We're spoiled, lazy Tri-State area snobs, let's get real. No one is driving to VT to meet you half way for a playoff.

Not willing to travel 1:45 to play a neutral site playoff= scared.

[Todd Lapham]

Bingo! Head to Head is the only tie breaker, if that doesn't apply, then it's up to the captains to decide. If they can't agree on something, then you play for it.

Thanks for the reply Todd.

So when you say play for it, you mean like both teams meet up and play each other in a tiebreaker match to decide who gets the right to pick the location of Finals? Nice. So who decides where this takes place?

Wait, I know, let's play for it. The team from Connecticut in conjuction with the team from Maine shall meet up.... and play each other to decide who gets the right to pick the location of the tiebreaker match to decide who gets the right to pick the location of Finals. Sounds solid to me, I'm glad it's worked out. So it's settled then. Let me ask you something, how do you all feel about frilly toothpicks? I'm FOR EM!

Obviously it would be at a central location if it comes to that. The part you missed is "IF CAPTAINS CAN'T AGREE" on another way to break the tie, then they play. You could play Rochambeau, flip a coin, have a rap battle, let Marvin pick etc.

There's no need for a set rule for this. I have a feeling if there was a rule of having to play at a central location, you'd be saying that there should be other options to pick from because travelling to break a tie is stupid and you already travel enough. Not to mention it could be dangerous. Hell you could just send 1 person if you wanted to as it's totally up to the two teams involved, which makes things far more optimal for all parties involved.

Captains agree on a neutral course during the season, there's no reason they can't again for a tiebreaker.

[Shawn Mullen]

Let me ask you something, how do you all feel about frilly toothpicks? I'm FOR EM!

Especially since I like my sandwiches with 3 pieces of bread.

[Matt DeAngelis]

Still, this is a IF. Still have to play out your remaining matches.

[Erik Siersdale]

Let me ask you something, how do you all feel about frilly toothpicks? I'm FOR EM!

Especially since I like my sandwiches with 3 pieces of bread.

I like my
sandwiches with alfalfa sprouts

[Jason Toothy]

Still, this is a IF. Still have to play out your remaining matches.

Exactly. I'd rather spend time preparing for our next challenge than involving myself too deeply in hypotheticals.

[jim tufts]

There's a lot of "no sh¡t?" going on around here. Cool! No sh¡t!?!?!

[Daniel Mack]

Let me be clear and say that I have nothing against the Mainers. I have extended family that live in Maine. I've played with Maine guys at Maple Hill and at West Thompson during TC events. I even played in a group with this dude Beefy once, who told me a story about his job that included a woman, her son with special needs, and a door-to-door census worker that was accidentally roughed up and locked inside of a closet after being mistaken for a troll. The census guys was a "little person." (i hope that's PC, i tried) Maine is awesome, I dig the whole lifestyle, I get it. I think the "maine" reason everyone else doesn't live there too is because it's located all the freakin way UP IN MAINE. But when you choose to live up there and enjoy it's many beautiful and unique perks, you also have to forfeit some other things. Like for instance, living less than several hours away from where the whole TC thing is goin down.

Now with that said, I think they deserve the exact same fairness and consideration as any of the other teams. No, I don't think they should bend over backwards for the rest of us because they live a short plane flight away. When it's our turn on the schedule, I'll throw my truckin shoes on and haul my junk up there so I can have fun playing dg all day with the Mainers. I'll enjoy not travelling when it's their turn. I'm all about fairness and equality, especially when it comes to sports and competition.

This is the rules thread and I asked for a ruling. The question is; which team picks the location of TC finals IF: (DeAngelis put the mouse down, we know it's "IF") two or more teams finish tied for first place AND, did not face each other in the regular season?

The commish says:

Obviously it would be at a central location if it comes to that. The part you missed is "IF CAPTAINS CAN'T AGREE" on another way to break the tie, then they play. You could play Rochambeau, flip a coin, have a rap battle, let Marvin pick etc.

There's no need for a set rule for this. I have a feeling if there was a rule of having to play at a central location, you'd be saying that there should be other options to pick from because travelling to break a tie is stupid and you already travel enough. Not to mention it could be dangerous. Hell you could just send 1 person if you wanted to as it's totally up to the two teams involved, which makes things far more optimal for all parties involved.

Well, I'm not the captain of the team but I do know my team, and I know there aren't many that are just going to volunteer to spend a half a day driving to figure something out that should already be figured out. Not all the way, not half way, not this time of year. It's just how it is. I doubt that PHill is going to travel all the way down here either.

I have to respectfully disagree with "There's no need for a set rule for this." I think there definitely is a need for a set rule to determine tiebreakers. I think the evidence of this is clearly displayed by the fact that there already IS A RULE FOR THIS but it's ineffective, because it's flawed and doesn't account for all scenarios. It should be fixed for the future which is very simple and isn't the problem. The problem is with what happens this year while the rule is broken. Hand picking the location for finals is kind of significant. It's not a minor detail like "who's provides lunch."

I previously only *suggested* that: in lieu of a rule that actually works, the team from Maine defer to the team from CT, taking into account the geographical location of everyone else effected, common courtesy and basic logic. At the end of the day this doesn't just effect us, there's 5 teams that might have to drive to and from Maine based on a coin flip.

Let's get a rule in place for next year that covers everything, the rule itself doesn't matter as much as the fact that it's there and devoid of flaws. Do you think this is never going to happen again? There's currently 12 teams and only 5 matches. It's not exactly like hitting the lotto.

I guess the fairest thing I can come up with for this year is just a good old fashion, democratic vote. Let the voices of those involved make the final call. IF it comes down to it, final tiebreaker is all other B pool captains break the tie by voting on who's regular season performance should give them the to right pick finals location.

[Sean Healy]

What incentive does this give the bottom two A pool teams to attend finals?

My question has been lost among the precocious B-Pooler banter. If the bottom 2 A pool teams are already going to the B-Pool after the regular season, why would they even show up to finals? Doesn't this ruin it for the 5th and 6th seeds? Am I missing something here?

[Daniel Mack]

I think I see your point. Why not just tell 7 and 8 to have a seat and let 1-6 play a pool style finals? Gives 5 and 6 a chance to compete with 1-4.

[Daniel Mack]

Don't ask me, I didn't draw any of this up.

[Jeff Burrows]

Rooting for both PHill and Tolland to both lose their last 2 matches.

[Todd Lapham]

I think there definitely is a need for a set rule to determine tiebreakers. I think the evidence of this is clearly displayed by the fact that there already IS A RULE FOR THIS but it's ineffective, because it's flawed and doesn't account for all scenarios. It should be fixed for the future which is very simple and isn't the problem. The problem is with what happens this year while the rule is broken.

Dmack, what rule do you think there should be to break a tie? Amongst all that wall of text, I see no suggestion.

I'm really at a loss to see how letting the captains decide how to break the tie isn't best. If they can't agree on something they play for it. Flexibility is key.

Does this just boil down to another not wanting to go to Maine thing?

[Charlie Holmgren]

What incentive does this give the bottom two A pool teams to attend finals?

My question has been lost among the precocious B-Pooler banter. If the bottom 2 A pool teams are already going to the B-Pool after the regular season, why would they even show up to finals? Doesn't this ruin it for the 5th and 6th seeds? Am I missing something here?

Don't the bottom 2 go to B pool finals?

[Eric Kevorkian]

Jim, in one instance you're saying that you think the Mainers should be treated equally, and they are no different from any other team in the TC.

In the next you're saying that they should defer to CT because of location and "common courtesy". That doesn't sound like there's any equality there....

[Eric Kevorkian]

What incentive does this give the bottom two A pool teams to attend finals?

My question has been lost among the precocious B-Pooler banter. If the bottom 2 A pool teams are already going to the B-Pool after the regular season, why would they even show up to finals? Doesn't this ruin it for the 5th and 6th seeds? Am I missing something here?

Don't the bottom 2 go to B pool finals?

Negative. Finals structure has changed completely...something not many people are aware of I think. Go check it out...it looks like a lot of fun!

Bottom 2 will play in A-pool finals and will be relegated to B-pool the next year.

[Steven Dakai]

It really comes down to the goal of finals. Do we want a successful B pool finals that is well attended? The results have no meaning,its just for bragging rights so it seems that we want to have every team represented well. If that is true the having finals somewhere central is the most logical choice.

Here is the criteria for finals:(not many courses will even come close)
Large course that can handle 100+ players
Parking for 50-75 cars( lot must be clear of snow and not a mud hole)
Electricity
Grill or fire pits for cooking
Bathrooms
Hotels in the vicinity

Why not have two captains (if tied) submit a list of three choices that have all of these thing to Todd. Let him choose,assuming they can't.

Just my thoughts...

[Kelly Conroy]

We should predetermine where each finals is going to be before the season starts...like the NFL does for the Super Bowl. Rotate the locations each year so every area will eventually have a shot at hosting.

[Joe Gara]

That sounds reasonable Steve if the Captains can't agree.

Now that we have all that sorted out, what about tie breakers for seeding in the A pool? Since we'll be seeding 1-8, a tie is much more likely somewhere in the middle & could effect who plays for the championship (1-4) vs chumpionship (5-8).

Below is speculation and up to the commish, but I'd guess tie breakers in order are:

-season record
-head to head
-then what? teams might have the same record but may not have played each other, my guess is point differential, and I'd say point diff over the season since no head to head.
-if still a tie, roshambo or cry on this forum for hours & hours & then flip a disc.

And how many people per team get to play in finals? are we setting a # or will it depend on the # that show?

Thanks Todd & sorry if this is answered on the Captains thread, Uncle Bill has retired from that too and Team Captain Lawrence's current leadership structure is based on the Occupy movement: 90% to agree, tough but fair.

Love you all,
Joe

[Shawn Mullen]

[jim tufts]

TL;DR on the bulk of this. Who's got my heady cliff's?

[Daniel Mack]

I think there definitely is a need for a set rule to determine tiebreakers. I think the evidence of this is clearly displayed by the fact that there already IS A RULE FOR THIS but it's ineffective, because it's flawed and doesn't account for all scenarios. It should be fixed for the future which is very simple and isn't the problem. The problem is with what happens this year while the rule is broken.

Dmack, what rule do you think there should be to break a tie? Amongst all that wall of text, I see no suggestion.

I'm really at a loss to see how letting the captains decide how to break the tie isn't best. If they can't agree on something they play for it. Flexibility is key.

Does this just boil down to another not wanting to go to Maine thing?

The rule right now is head to head, but in this case it doesn't apply. There were suggestions made earlier in the thread, most of them seem reasonable and are what other sports like the NFL use for their tiebreakers. Points differential, record vs like opponents, etc....I thought I was clear when I said that any of these will work fine, I don't care what it is so much as that there is a rule in place that eliminates the need for subjectivity. You guys do realize that even if we lose there could still be a tiebreaker issue, and it may involve MORE than just our 2 teams? It could happen with 4 teams. Todd, you keep saying "play for it" like it's the simple answer. If the captains can't agree and we "play for it," a location and a date still has to be agreed upon for when we "play for it." This is not a solution, the logic is going around in circles, don't you get it? Regardless of what the rule is next year, we still have to deal with this year. We're not playing an entire extra match to decide a tiebreaker. What if 3 teams were tied and hadn't played each other? Then what? Play for it still? We need a rule. You seem like a pretty bright guy, there's no way you aren't grasping this. What do you have against a tiebreaker rule that works and covers everything?