Pinball info
Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Play Expo - Pinball Battle
- Thread starter Wayne J
- Start date
Having read, and taken on board, all of the comments above I'd like to answer A few of them.
Firstly thank you for all of the positive comments. As it was the first comp held at Expo there were always going to be challeges.
Expo asked NLP to run a comp, NLP approached me and asked if I'd be interested in running a comp.
Obviously, I jumped at the opportunity. After a meeting with the NLP guys, with plenty of follow up emails, the main things I needed to consider when constructing the format were:
Not wanting to take 'premium' machines off the main show floor, there have been complaints at many big shows that certain games were unavailable for play, without having to enter a comp; hence duplicates were used as much as possible.
The time constraints were rigid, NLP do not control opening or closing times, the competition HAD to be finished on time without exception. Having seen the UKCS Final, and UK League finals run over to a second day the last couple of years, that was a major worry.
Having the chance to qualify on the Sunday - this meant that you did not have to qualify on the Saturday and then potentially play the finals on the Sunday. This would have meant a hotel stay, and entry tickets on both days, putting a number of people off entering, or having the opportunity to enter.
Entry price, rather than having a single entry fee of £10, which was likely to put off first timers, make it the same price as a drink at the show, and allow people to enter as many times as they desired. A couple of people managed to qualify after a single attempt, others needed more.
The choice of games was down to me. I'm fed up of seeing the same games used time and time again. I wanted a full range of games from as many eras as possible. I also wanted games which weren't too linear, which had different options as to game play, games with risk vs reward strategies. Do you try and go for the triple multiball stack to crush your opponent on BSD (which no one managed) or do you play it safe and take a single multiball to put some points on the board.
I believe that for a winner to be truly seen as being the best player, they must be able to play on any machine put in front of them, without practise, to be able to adapt to how the game is playing, whether that be a switch not working, a tight tilt, whatever.
From the feedback I've had in person, as well as what I've read here, everyone who actually entered or watched thought it went well and enjoyed it.
As for the format favouring more experienced players or not.
The aim of any tournament must surely be to identify the best player on the day, or weekend? I think that was achieved on the day. BUT , to stop it being boring and monotonous there must be a realistic opportunity of the (and I mean no disrespect by this) lesser players progressing as well. There were at least 4 players who made the last 16 who I doubt many would have predicted. Dina especially played fantastically to get 3rd place, despite only finishing 18th in qualifying and getting into the finals because of 2 no shows. Marie Dutton played a single ticket and qualified, but couldn't make the finals. A person who had never entered any previous competitions, was local to Manchester, and doesn't know of anywhere else to play pinball qualified in 2nd place, but didn't attend on the Sunday.
A standard PAPA final gives a player a chance to have a poor game and recover in later games, again favouring the 'better players'.
The idea of last player drops out, was that you could still have a poor game and progress, you just couldn't have a disastrous game, but it always depends on how the other player plays. Nick's score of 19mil on Iron Man would have won every other game, except the one he actually played in.
Tilts.
The tilts on some machines were tighter than on others, without question. Why though should you be able to manhandle every game all over the place. A number of the games turned up without tilt bobs at all. I play tested all of the machines before hand to test the tilt. I didn't tilt TZ or Circus and managed pretty decent scores while doing so. If you think the tilt was too harsh for your style of play in qualifying, simply play a different machine?
Firstly thank you for all of the positive comments. As it was the first comp held at Expo there were always going to be challeges.
Expo asked NLP to run a comp, NLP approached me and asked if I'd be interested in running a comp.
Obviously, I jumped at the opportunity. After a meeting with the NLP guys, with plenty of follow up emails, the main things I needed to consider when constructing the format were:
Not wanting to take 'premium' machines off the main show floor, there have been complaints at many big shows that certain games were unavailable for play, without having to enter a comp; hence duplicates were used as much as possible.
The time constraints were rigid, NLP do not control opening or closing times, the competition HAD to be finished on time without exception. Having seen the UKCS Final, and UK League finals run over to a second day the last couple of years, that was a major worry.
Having the chance to qualify on the Sunday - this meant that you did not have to qualify on the Saturday and then potentially play the finals on the Sunday. This would have meant a hotel stay, and entry tickets on both days, putting a number of people off entering, or having the opportunity to enter.
Entry price, rather than having a single entry fee of £10, which was likely to put off first timers, make it the same price as a drink at the show, and allow people to enter as many times as they desired. A couple of people managed to qualify after a single attempt, others needed more.
The choice of games was down to me. I'm fed up of seeing the same games used time and time again. I wanted a full range of games from as many eras as possible. I also wanted games which weren't too linear, which had different options as to game play, games with risk vs reward strategies. Do you try and go for the triple multiball stack to crush your opponent on BSD (which no one managed) or do you play it safe and take a single multiball to put some points on the board.
I believe that for a winner to be truly seen as being the best player, they must be able to play on any machine put in front of them, without practise, to be able to adapt to how the game is playing, whether that be a switch not working, a tight tilt, whatever.
From the feedback I've had in person, as well as what I've read here, everyone who actually entered or watched thought it went well and enjoyed it.
As for the format favouring more experienced players or not.
The aim of any tournament must surely be to identify the best player on the day, or weekend? I think that was achieved on the day. BUT , to stop it being boring and monotonous there must be a realistic opportunity of the (and I mean no disrespect by this) lesser players progressing as well. There were at least 4 players who made the last 16 who I doubt many would have predicted. Dina especially played fantastically to get 3rd place, despite only finishing 18th in qualifying and getting into the finals because of 2 no shows. Marie Dutton played a single ticket and qualified, but couldn't make the finals. A person who had never entered any previous competitions, was local to Manchester, and doesn't know of anywhere else to play pinball qualified in 2nd place, but didn't attend on the Sunday.
A standard PAPA final gives a player a chance to have a poor game and recover in later games, again favouring the 'better players'.
The idea of last player drops out, was that you could still have a poor game and progress, you just couldn't have a disastrous game, but it always depends on how the other player plays. Nick's score of 19mil on Iron Man would have won every other game, except the one he actually played in.
Tilts.
The tilts on some machines were tighter than on others, without question. Why though should you be able to manhandle every game all over the place. A number of the games turned up without tilt bobs at all. I play tested all of the machines before hand to test the tilt. I didn't tilt TZ or Circus and managed pretty decent scores while doing so. If you think the tilt was too harsh for your style of play in qualifying, simply play a different machine?
Agreed, although the entry price was more like half the cost of a drink at the venue! 
Challenges / what can be improved on.
The layout of the machines, the seated waiting area, monitors, entrance desk could all be moved around a little to make things work better.
A little more time could have been spent on actually play testing the machines used, rather than just changing settings in the menu. Unfortunately due to bringing machines myself this just wasn't possible, as I arrived significantly later than anticipated and minus a machine.
In an ideal world I'd have been able to supervise the setting up of everything - but that's not the way the NLP crew work - EVERYONE mucks in and does what's needed or offers help - exactly as it should be.
It was also the first time any of us had used the software so we focused on that.
I was disappointed that there was little promotion of the comp outside of our area. We all expected EXPO to push the comp a bit more, either with posters, flyers or even showing the streaming on the large screens, but again that was out of our control.
The layout of the machines, the seated waiting area, monitors, entrance desk could all be moved around a little to make things work better.
A little more time could have been spent on actually play testing the machines used, rather than just changing settings in the menu. Unfortunately due to bringing machines myself this just wasn't possible, as I arrived significantly later than anticipated and minus a machine.
In an ideal world I'd have been able to supervise the setting up of everything - but that's not the way the NLP crew work - EVERYONE mucks in and does what's needed or offers help - exactly as it should be.
It was also the first time any of us had used the software so we focused on that.
I was disappointed that there was little promotion of the comp outside of our area. We all expected EXPO to push the comp a bit more, either with posters, flyers or even showing the streaming on the large screens, but again that was out of our control.
I think 16 put of 82 into the finals (20% ish) is about right. It means that the qualifiers have earned it, rather than just finishing top half.SO (In my extremely biased opinion) what would I like to see going forward in order to encourage more play/competitiveness/rivalry. A bigger cut line makes sense to me, make it 32, but bring in byes (1st-4th get 2 byes, 5th-16th get 1 bye) and incentivize the top positions. Put a cash bounty on top qualifier. Allow those top qualifiers to have choice of machine in the finals (ooooooh, I know we don't like that in the UK, but if a PAPA style tournament can be successfully received then maybe the times are a changin'.....maybe not) Basically just put in place more reasons to play so that every machine is being played non stop! Incentivize the top 8-10 players to want to keep on playing, rather than just sticking with their entry that they know will get them in.
I'm sure Wayne, Paul, Ian etc thought about all the things that I have said. And as the first go at it, it was definitely important to not try and run before you can walk, but now it has been proven, lets F***ing Usain Bolt it out of the park.
One way of getting all the players to keep playing would be to use the same machines in the finals as the qualifying. The main issue would be that the games would then be only used in the comp and not available for general play. They'd also need to be bullet proof to last 2 whole days of constant play.
Personally I'm not overly keen on the bye system. The benefit you get for qualifying well should be seeding rather than missing a round imho.
I too was a little disappointed about the total number of people entering, but hopefully word will spread (both about the quality and the WPPR pts) and we can get more travelling from Europe to come and show their skills - especially if we can get it on the European qualifying tour.
Due to Wayne' and teams sterling efforts folk will look forward to the comp next year . seems the best format for a large event raising funds for a good cause
The main gripe of taking cream machines out of public play was avoided . " I really wanted to play transformers .. Oh look another one over there!"
Hopefully expo will promote better next time and maybe a large projection like the video game guys had for their 80s pop fest would be fun but these are tweaks
NLP is the UKs biggest pinball showcase and competive play has always brought new folks into the hobby so an excellent run tournament has added to the occasion
To be honest outside the coin op areas show seemed a bit flat but hey the arcade games are the ultimate gaming retro so SHOULD be the highlight!
The main gripe of taking cream machines out of public play was avoided . " I really wanted to play transformers .. Oh look another one over there!"
Hopefully expo will promote better next time and maybe a large projection like the video game guys had for their 80s pop fest would be fun but these are tweaks
NLP is the UKs biggest pinball showcase and competive play has always brought new folks into the hobby so an excellent run tournament has added to the occasion
To be honest outside the coin op areas show seemed a bit flat but hey the arcade games are the ultimate gaming retro so SHOULD be the highlight!
D
Deleted member 2463
so you choose to favour those with better aim over those with better nudging skills?
I submit Wayne you have great aim in my view it should be as consistent as possible. I tilted TZ without nudging it - maybe too hard on the flipper buttons! PAPA guidance on this makes sense to me and risk of tilt through in finals.
Machine choice was good but still think having a modern game is important.
cheers,
Neil.
I think it was an excellent comp, great to have a different format and as already mentioned streaming and commentary were amazing for first attempt during a UK comp.
Won't repeat a lot of the positive comments that others have already made which I agree wholeheartedly with and well done to Wayne and team for a very well run, smooth comp but I do have a few thoughts on what's been said so far:
Format - if you do extend to 32 qualifiers, you're almost guaranteeing a place for all the more experienced players. I know pretty much everyone who you'd expect to qualify did so within the 16 but you'd make that even more certain with 32.
However, I do like the idea of byes for top qualifiers, maybe as Craig said 2 for 1-4 and 1 for 5-16 to give that extra incentive for those experienced players to have another go to improve their position and in doing so will raise more money for charity And you give more chance for the less experienced players to make the cut and get the experience of knockout rounds with 32.
Number of entrants - maybe not bad for first comp at Play Expo, maybe more were expected but I do believe it's down to 2 factors:
- poor promotion by Play Expo. If you didn't know it was on before, only way you found out on the day is if you happened to wander into the right area. You might have even missed it altogether with all the other pins to play
- entry price. I know to most of us £4 seems a very fair price to pay especially when money going to charity but for the less experienced players maybe this seemed a lot on top of the entry price, travel etc when they'll be unfamiliar with comps, how format works and might just be enough to put them off.
It could help with more signs around the show esp in other pin areas and announcements for the comp.
With the price, maybe a way to encourage those unsure and reluctant to part with the £4, first entry is free for everyone to encourage more players to have a go, with even maybe the 2nd entry a £1 for non IFPA registered players - that way you target the novice competitors but full price for regulars. If they then want more entries, ie once you've hopefully got them hooked then maybe charge full £4.
Won't repeat a lot of the positive comments that others have already made which I agree wholeheartedly with and well done to Wayne and team for a very well run, smooth comp but I do have a few thoughts on what's been said so far:
Format - if you do extend to 32 qualifiers, you're almost guaranteeing a place for all the more experienced players. I know pretty much everyone who you'd expect to qualify did so within the 16 but you'd make that even more certain with 32.
However, I do like the idea of byes for top qualifiers, maybe as Craig said 2 for 1-4 and 1 for 5-16 to give that extra incentive for those experienced players to have another go to improve their position and in doing so will raise more money for charity
And you give more chance for the less experienced players to make the cut and get the experience of knockout rounds with 32. Number of entrants - maybe not bad for first comp at Play Expo, maybe more were expected but I do believe it's down to 2 factors:
- poor promotion by Play Expo. If you didn't know it was on before, only way you found out on the day is if you happened to wander into the right area. You might have even missed it altogether with all the other pins to play
- entry price. I know to most of us £4 seems a very fair price to pay especially when money going to charity but for the less experienced players maybe this seemed a lot on top of the entry price, travel etc when they'll be unfamiliar with comps, how format works and might just be enough to put them off.
It could help with more signs around the show esp in other pin areas and announcements for the comp.
With the price, maybe a way to encourage those unsure and reluctant to part with the £4, first entry is free for everyone to encourage more players to have a go, with even maybe the 2nd entry a £1 for non IFPA registered players - that way you target the novice competitors but full price for regulars. If they then want more entries, ie once you've hopefully got them hooked then maybe charge full £4.
D
Deleted member 2463
4 quid; when a game of pinball is usually £1? 3 games - seems ok here.
Maybe to you and me but when all other games are for free I do wonder if some people who haven't competed before were put off by the charge and I thought the idea was to encourage new players. Might be wrong but possible and how clear was it that all monies went to charity which could be the deciding factor?
D
Deleted member 2463
good point greg - but machine choice might help - imagine if dialled in and Star Wars were in the lineup!
Honestly I think entries would have massively ballooned if there was a simple, huge banner saying CHARITY PINBALL COMPETITION on or over the desk that could be seen from the other side of the retro game setup area. That alone would attract have-a-go-heroes and people expecting to do crap, but "hey, it's for charity!"
You can get people to do virtually anything if it's for charity and is obviously fun. While the screens and papers that were there were clear enough for most of us, you really do have to shove it in people's faces for it to be seen easily for people that are dumbstruck by all the pinball games as it already stands.
You can get people to do virtually anything if it's for charity and is obviously fun. While the screens and papers that were there were clear enough for most of us, you really do have to shove it in people's faces for it to be seen easily for people that are dumbstruck by all the pinball games as it already stands.
There was an 'early entry' price of £3 for tickets bought before 1pm Saturday. From memory I don't think there were many newbies taking advantage of that though. Just the experienced players that knew about the comp waiting to buy in as soon as possible.
Play did do some promotion over Facebook, but nothing really at the venue. That was partly our (NLP) fault. There were some last minute things going on and designing a pull-up banner for the comp area was one of the things that had to be ditched for other things to go ahead.
All good comments though, very appreciated.
Play did do some promotion over Facebook, but nothing really at the venue. That was partly our (NLP) fault. There were some last minute things going on and designing a pull-up banner for the comp area was one of the things that had to be ditched for other things to go ahead.
All good comments though, very appreciated.
I didn't get out of bed early enough for that
That £755 ticket sales figure is quite interesting actually.
Had it been a standard tournament with a £10 ( aka an Ayrton) entry fee with 82 entrants it would have raised £820.
However newbies that stumbled across it and old hands that don't expect to be in the running for the last 16 might not have participated had they had to pay an Ayrton to do so.
Had it been a standard tournament with a £10 ( aka an Ayrton) entry fee with 82 entrants it would have raised £820.
However newbies that stumbled across it and old hands that don't expect to be in the running for the last 16 might not have participated had they had to pay an Ayrton to do so.
Should be said that all ticket sales go to the TCT because of the generous sponsorship of Replay Events, the organisers of Play Expo, who provided the cash prizes, the trophies, and cash for the tournament software, as well as the space, power, internet connection and chairs/barriers/tables/etc to make it happen - thanks a million guys if you are reading, I'm sure this tournament will have significantly increased the pinball community's interest in the show.
Also thanks to Playfield Protectors for sponsoring us with a prize for the winner and a 10% discount on an order from them for everyone who took part - if you didn't pick up a code at the time and you took part and want one now, contact me directly and I'll send you one.
I saw at first hand the work that Wayne, Paul, Tim and Ian (and sorry if I've missed someone) put in to make this a success - these things don't just happen and it is a great credit to them that it mainly ran so smoothly, and when it didn't at the beginning that was handled calmly and efficiently - really well done guys, top class.
Also thanks to Playfield Protectors for sponsoring us with a prize for the winner and a 10% discount on an order from them for everyone who took part - if you didn't pick up a code at the time and you took part and want one now, contact me directly and I'll send you one.
I saw at first hand the work that Wayne, Paul, Tim and Ian (and sorry if I've missed someone) put in to make this a success - these things don't just happen and it is a great credit to them that it mainly ran so smoothly, and when it didn't at the beginning that was handled calmly and efficiently - really well done guys, top class.
We wanted to keep it accessible to casual players and newbies and therefore inexpensive. The discount for early entries was particularly meant to foster that, as well as encourage play at a time which is often quiet in tournaments. Also to make it so that repeat entries were available to most people, not just those with deep pockets. I think the possibility of repeat attempts at qualification are a great feature - the idea that you aren't ruled out of the tournament because of one unlucky game really appeals to me. I think most people who qualified had more than one attempt.
For info, I think the person that bought the most tickets clocked in at 13 tickets (and you can use neverdrains to check that it was infact you Dan).
I would like to pretend that It was just because I wanted to give loads to charity, not because I'm crap at pinball but really competitive.
I think this would work really well for people like me, who are ok at times but not quite good enough to compete properly, but would make it a bit more difficult to fit into the time constraints at Play expo. BUT, the comp did finish quite early on the sunday (compare to usual finals at events) so maybe there is enough time to add 1 extra round after the qualifying cut-off. Maybe top 28 qualify, 12 straight through with 13-28 playing 4 player games to determine who goes through 13-16, then carry on as it was this time?
OR, top score on any of the games in qualifying gets you into the 13-16 playoff, so you can be rewarded for doing well even if you aren't consistently good. Perhaps wouldn't have made a difference, but maybe people would concentrate on trying to get top score on 1 machine. Loads of tries that got near to top score but not quite there would affect the other points given from that game effecting peoples 3 game scores as well, so adding a bit more to the strategy.
If you had 1 free entry advertised as part of the entry into the expo, most people would come along and have a go. This would lead to more queues and more buzz and excitement around the competition area. Some of these people would get hooked and keep playing, even if they then just played more in the non-competition pinball, it would get more people into pinball, which is what most people on here want.
You would need more competition staff volunteers to make sure people only started 1 player games etc as some would be complete beginners. It would make the machine queues more relevant as well because there would be more people playing (or waiting) at any one time so maybe a screen above each machine listing the high scores and queue for that machine would be needed. This does then add to the organisation requirements, but with enough people on here seeing how good the comp can be I'm sure we could get more volunteers. I'll put myself forward to help in any way that I can.
I would like to pretend that It was just because I wanted to give loads to charity, not because I'm crap at pinball but really competitive.
If I was the other side of the desk, I'd have likely been right there with you. No shame intended! I think it's fantastic to see people (and you certainly weren't alone) trying and trying again. You were in the cut-off bracket more than once, but unfortunate there were some great late entries that bumped you out again.
Phew, at least I didn't have the most entries 
When you're just outside the cut off zone it's very tempting to have just one more go.... I just can't seem to have 3 good games in a row though, the more I played, the worse I got
.
Great job by all involved though, thoroughly enjoyed it, best comp at the NLP yet by miles.
When you're just outside the cut off zone it's very tempting to have just one more go.... I just can't seem to have 3 good games in a row though, the more I played, the worse I got
.Great job by all involved though, thoroughly enjoyed it, best comp at the NLP yet by miles.
£755 to charity is ace, well done everyone.
well organised and streamed. people moan about this multi-entry format when it all goes into the winners' prize pot (doesn't bother me) but i think the whole format was excellent. i'd support a larger number of qualifiers - maybe 24 or 32, but i also enjoyed watching my name drop slowly but surely out of the top 16. agree that the games were well chosen, of decent standard, tilts not too bad, pricing reasonable, timing good, score recording a big improvement, all round an A+, i hope that others try to use this scoring method in future as well (but with >16 to go through).
well organised and streamed. people moan about this multi-entry format when it all goes into the winners' prize pot (doesn't bother me) but i think the whole format was excellent. i'd support a larger number of qualifiers - maybe 24 or 32, but i also enjoyed watching my name drop slowly but surely out of the top 16. agree that the games were well chosen, of decent standard, tilts not too bad, pricing reasonable, timing good, score recording a big improvement, all round an A+, i hope that others try to use this scoring method in future as well (but with >16 to go through).
When you're just outside the cut off zone it's very tempting to have just one more go.... I just can't seem to have 3 good games in a row though, the more I played, the worse I got
I think that was part of the fun for me. looking at what others who were just above me had played and trying to get a score on that machine. If I got a better score than the one used in their 3 game score, then their points total dropped by one, which was enough to demote them and promote me on a couple of occasions, even if that entry was no good overall.
I was a bit worried when Craig arrived on Sunday morning because I was in 16th, but Craig played different games to me so although he scored more than me and jumped straight into the top 5, my score didn't get affected by it when others did, so I stayed in 16th and someone who was above me dropped out of the top 16.
Tournament results up in the IFPA website.
TGP 100%
41 'ranked' players
19 players with less than 5 comps
More impressively
21 players who had never before entered a competition.
Pts for winning 25.
Would have been much more had some of the more highly ranked UK players had entered. (Martin, Rich, David, Phil etc. etc.)
Hopefully next year we can get this entered onto the European tour to further encourage the best players in Europe to enter.
TGP 100%
41 'ranked' players
19 players with less than 5 comps
More impressively
21 players who had never before entered a competition.
Pts for winning 25.
Would have been much more had some of the more highly ranked UK players had entered. (Martin, Rich, David, Phil etc. etc.)
Hopefully next year we can get this entered onto the European tour to further encourage the best players in Europe to enter.
If only the points system wasn't brutal to UK players..!
I know that this might be a bit "New Labour" for folk, but ....
Might it be worthwhile limiting the number of tries people can have. Say 5 attempts ? I know that the argument might be that this is for charity so if mugs are daft enough to keep handing over money, take 'em for all you can. Indeed put fixed odds betting terminals, hookers and coke dealers next to the admin desk to really strip the money from these guys
But in many sports there are mechanisms to stop this sort of thing ... 50 ahead by half time in a rugby match, boxing matches being stopped, formula one has limitations on qualifying
Might it be worthwhile limiting the number of tries people can have. Say 5 attempts ? I know that the argument might be that this is for charity so if mugs are daft enough to keep handing over money, take 'em for all you can. Indeed put fixed odds betting terminals, hookers and coke dealers next to the admin desk to really strip the money from these guys
But in many sports there are mechanisms to stop this sort of thing ... 50 ahead by half time in a rugby match, boxing matches being stopped, formula one has limitations on qualifying
News to me. Didn't realise you could play multiple times. Damn, if I knew that I would of had another go.
Extensive discussion here:
http://tiltforums.com/t/why-do-people-not-like-unlimited-qualifying/1380
https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/detailed-descrption-of-herb-format
The gist of it is that (for non charity events) it helps create a bigger prize pool - let's not forget that pinball is still relatively small especially in the UK so this is not insubstantial - and also players that are all at once, inconsistent, deep-pocketed and are capable of generating a lucky ticket to qualify, are not incentivised to do so for a win, because they stand no chance in the actual finals against more consistent players. The spectre of 'pay to win' has always been there with this format but it doesn't really seem to be generating much actual problem.
There is also the problem that people would be less likely to travel if a single bad game ruins their entire tournament chance. I can only speak for myself, but I know that my planned Saturday-only trip became a full weekend trip because I felt like I stood a chance.
My addiction to this expensive hobby grows by the day, so today risking an early wipeout doesn't feel like a factor to me anymore, but I can't pretend that it wasn't a factor in me changing my plans last weekend.
D
Deleted member 2463
in my view its up to the player if he wants to spend the dough; in real terms it doesn't make a difference the PAPA guys have proven that pretty conclusively. I had 12 plays I think on the day, only three of them actually improved my position.
What would have really helped would have been able to pick three different individual games from the 36 that I played although still wouldn't have qualified.
Neil.
What would have really helped would have been able to pick three different individual games from the 36 that I played although still wouldn't have qualified.
Neil.
I think it needed more visual encouragement for people to play, it wasn't overly visible for the through traffic, with a bank of machines in front of the tournament area. It did seem very quiet all the time and with such a huge area it could have been so much more. However, Wayne and the rest of the team did seem relaxed throughout which is always a good thing.
Streaming was excellent, nice to be able to watch for people who couldn't make it
I don't personally agree with changing the rules on the fly, if you have published rules, I think they should be rigidly stuck to (but then Dina wouldn't have been allowed into the finals and she had a deserved 3rd place).
Format is great, it gives people opportunity if they have a poor set of games, it may be an idea to handicap the higher ranked players in some way by giving them a max amount of tries? Although that may then reduce the amount going to charity.
Extremely nice of the Play team to give all that they did.
I think the seeds are there, it just needs to be supported well, with top players from the UK and abroad. It could easily become one of the bigger European tournaments
10/10 for everyone involved
Streaming was excellent, nice to be able to watch for people who couldn't make it
I don't personally agree with changing the rules on the fly, if you have published rules, I think they should be rigidly stuck to (but then Dina wouldn't have been allowed into the finals and she had a deserved 3rd place).
Format is great, it gives people opportunity if they have a poor set of games, it may be an idea to handicap the higher ranked players in some way by giving them a max amount of tries? Although that may then reduce the amount going to charity.
Extremely nice of the Play team to give all that they did.
I think the seeds are there, it just needs to be supported well, with top players from the UK and abroad. It could easily become one of the bigger European tournaments
10/10 for everyone involved
3 quarters of my way through the Twitch feed and have to say, very good. I watch a lot of the PAPA stuff and you guys did a great job. Commentating was good and knowledge of the games was excellent. Really enjoyed guys.