You're a Bunch of Factors

Based on our current competition format we are discussing ways to increase if not maintain player numbers in the last three weeks of each season.
One of the valid points we are discussing is offering double points for tournament winners in the last three weeks of the season.
So instead of a player receiving 1 pt per player for winning a tournament they would receive 2pt per players.
EG: 50 runner tournament, winner normally gets 60 points under the usual system. In the last three weeks of the season a winner would receive 110points.

I know this might upset many players but I would like to remind everyone of how popular the Tonsley and Grand Junction game was. This promotion would enable regular event player to still qualify for finals in the last three weeks of play, when the venue leaderboard is generally locked up.

this could mess up the top 5's in some placers big time

Personally I don't like the idea.

Maybe double prize values for the last weeks but not points. Or maybe all winners in the final 3 weeks of a region play ina touney/sit-n-go for chipsets or something.

But as has been said countless times, it is impossible to please everybody.

Would the bonus points be only for the winner of the tourney or all place getters? If so, I don't like the idea much,people that have had a good season could end up out in a couple of weeks because of the bonus points.

I think you need to figure a way of getting players to stay that doesnt include messing with the points - Maybe better prizes in those weeks - I know that some venues offer great cash incentives for winners but other venues dont offer much at all. For instance, where I play at the Bremen, a $40 voucher for first that needs to be used within 7 days but not on a Thursday (the night the game is held) isnt much of an attraction to come back if you can't make it, where as places that offer the $$$ for first, it is worth going to try & win it even if you can't qualify.

If the venues are spewing becuase they are lacking people in the last few weeks of every season, maybe they should be the ones offering incentives for people to keep attending? I mean, a $40 voucher doesnt even cover what you spend to get your cards filled up. I think what NPL offer & how the qualifications work to make the finals are very fair. I think changing them would give some people a disadvantage when they play solid & consistent week by week. It could be hard to police with so many venues & players, but maybe offer double points only to the ones that have attended every week of the season, otherwise you could take your chance & only play the last 4 or 5.

I think if you are thinking of doing this to keep numbers up in the last few weeks, first look at the venues where the numbers are dropping dramatically in those last weeks. Are the venues tight? Are their prizes any good? Are players going somewhere else in those last few weeks to try & win a decent 1st prize because they can't qualify & would like to get something out of it?

Anyway, just a few thoughts!!!!!!

No, not at all.

This will totally screw with the top five system, and its unfair to players that have played all seven games of the season to be screwed by the final three weeks because you get double points.

If you want to increase revenue for the final three weeks Garth, offering more prizes or like shark said, a sit-and-go tourny could work.

I'm so glad it wasn't brought up on the forum by one of us???????

Personally, I hate the idea but that's me.

Personally i dont like the double points purely on the fact that for people who only play one venue n try n make top 5 are at a huge disadvantage if they r sitting 5th from working hard all season n then some one sitting 40th at that venue places highly in those last 3 weeks n may have only ever played that venue once before the bonus 3 weeks period n they knock that player out who turns up every week to support that venue n NPL.

Thats not me but i could see alot of people bringing up that arguement.

I'm all for increasing numbers, but I wouldn't compromise the points structure to do so.

In a season based event, there's always going to be down times, and up times - sometimes at the end, there might be less. I've noticed that some starts to seasons have had less too.

I voted yes, but after reading peoples thoughts, I have rethought my position to "Undecided".

Bonus points would probably have me continuing at a venue that is a regular, but it wouldn't take me to a new venue.

Given that my pointing ability has left me, it wouldn't make a difference anyway.

2007 Season 1, the final month had the SkyCity tickets available, that would've kept people going.

I can't think of any other ways to keep patronage up. If the bonus points only related to the 1st place getter, then the problems associated with longer running people complaining would reduce. (does that make sense?)

NO NO and bloody NO

You might say the popularity of the Tonsley & Pennington last minute scamper proves a point but i played against one of those qualifiers at the finals and shook my head how they even qualified
No disrespect but it was like taking candy from a baby

Perhaps Garth you should look at my Sit & Go topic a few weeks ago. Its just an idea but i think if the right carrot was dangled players would still play till the end of the season