How hard is it to finish top 9 in BSers to make the Finals?

The piano quote, if I remember correctly (crap, was it Van Cliburn?), was asking a legendary piano player who he thought was the best piano player in history. His answer was that there was no best piano player in history. You can either play, or you can’t. That’s all there is.

From the 200x perspective, I would agree that if you finish in the top 36, you have made a solid argument that you can play.

So the goal of structuring the tournament should be to find those Top 36, and turn them loose. Then BS should consider providing a format that provides those 36 an equal chance.

The current set-up of distinguishing the Top 9 may be to restrictive.

This is heading off into the weeds now, but if there are truly only a dozen guys whom everyone could agree are “The Best”, then there should be some sort of Masters Tournament where only a very select 12 invited managers play in five events.

I’m wondering though, across the BS community, if everyone would agree with your assessment about who those very Best Managers are...

J-Pav, the tournament attracted 250+ signups this year, about 100 more than any other year. We need to find a way to keep people interested and reduce the number of dropouts. If you reward only the top 36 or ?? with moving on, the tournament loses most of it's competition after 3 rounds.

If you read my earlier post, I don't like huge changes to the tour, most of us involved in it for a long time like it just the way it is.

I can tell those reading this that a 24-team FINAL is definitely NOT going to be considered. I just feel that I needed to jump in here and rule THAT out right away.

Rereading this, I’m a little confused.

BS basically rewards just nine managers. That increases participation/interest how again??

For participation, I stand with my Top 12 byes plus 24 quarterfinalists to get to the 36 semifinalists. That’s actually rewarding 84 managers from the outset (assuming a beginning pool of 200-250 managers).

I leave “huge changes” to the BS Board, but the participation jump may necessitate changes nonetheless. Huge is in the eye of the beholder. Getting rid of “Bonus Points” caused a lot of initial forum anxiety in 200x. However, in the three or four years since going to the one win equals one point method (incl playoffs), there have been ZERO posts saying we need to return to the bonus points method.

Personally, I’m agnostic on the 24 team consideration. Again, either you can play, or you can not. But that’s just my own opinion, and I would be perfectly willing to defer to the strong will of the community on how that might all shake out. As I said earlier, I’m way out of my lane here as a newb, so I’m just weighing in with a one manager’s opinion thing here.

To TLD,

I once read a quote regarding mastering the piano. I can’t find it exactly now, but to paraphrase:

“You can either play, or you can’t.”

In your opinion, out of the field of BS managers, how many “can play”?

Well here is an anecdotal answer...for instance, speaking as one of those who is not (ever) in the top 12, it was a different tour at the top tier without TLD in the mix. And assuredly, if he wouldn't have checked out, he would have been in the hunt for that top 9, as he typically is. Truthfully, I felt like a "slot" was set free.

And hopefully whatever is done, he plays in the next one.

In fact more generally, I'd posit it makes the game more fun when there are giants to chase--whether they are emulated, disparaged, or anything in between, the competition elicited by that benchmark of the handful of perennially elite players, is a positive thing. Even more fun is they don't all have identical play styles, or personalities, so from someone out in the cheap seats who doesn't play much, but plays these consistently:

1. I enjoy having a pinnacle to aspire to--it is a big deal to be near the top, so it should be an elite final group. A line always has to be drawn somewhere and a 12 team set is somewhat of a standard fare with schedule and play style. 24 team leagues have a different schedule balance and also lessen the importance of analyzing/adapting to opponents. It is much more random and less interactive in that sense. I don't matter, but I don't find them enjoyable. If there were only 24 team SOM leagues, I'd never play.

2. I also enjoy that even when missing that pinnacle tier, there is still a chance, necessarily slim, that a few of us clawing around outside that elite group, could compete with them.

I still agree that playoff results--that is short-run results--are statistically much less reliable than long-run results, ie multiple regular seasons in different parks/caps, in determining skill. This is unequivocal. Especially now that there is the invite feature this year.

At any rate, am glad the community comes out for these discussions in a way that shows how much passion and interest there is for this game. To competition...

I just to add the thoughts of one finishing well out of the running. I like the idea of the top nine receiving a bye. I would then take the next 36 finishers (10 - 45) to compete in Live Draft leagues for the final three spots. A live draft semis would be advantageous to the more skilled players, but also add the live draft experience to any who "get lucky" in the Semis.

To keep incentive for the remainder, have spots 46 - 81 compete in 12 team Auto draft semi-final leagues with the playoff teams then in a finals for Tier II title (PC format). This year only 21 points separate # 46 from # 81, so there would have been some great competition among similarly skilled players.

I think this can be good for new, younger competitors who are learning and, also, for those such as myself who are "aging out" but still enjoy the competition. The 24-team league format is not one that I enjoy and don't think that it builds as well on what players may have learned during the 6-event season.

The 2nd "Tier" tournament was talked about by the board and pitched to SOM. But I asked for prizes for the 2nd Tier winners and was denied by SOM. No additional prizes. So it ended there. But I admit I wanted to continue to negotiate more. What came out of that was - the (3) 24-team semi's.

I don't usually publicize things that don't end on a positive note. What WAS positive was giving a credit to the extra participants AND the windows computer game for the top 2 finishers in each semi.

Part of our off season review will be to look at the 2nd Tier potential "tournament" again. Might depend on what the numbers look like for participants in 2021. And if SOM will get behind prizes other than credits and computer game "codes" both of which cost them nothing.

That is penny wise and pound foolish by SOM. The computer game prizes indeed cost nothing, just a download, and a free credit or two is nothing compared to the amount of money made by SOM from credits spent to participate in the second tier tournament.

The company seemed to be moving to a more enlightened approach to customer service with the ascendancy of Hal's son to
CEO, but this just seems petty, ill-advised and downright stupid by SOM.

That is penny wise and pound foolish by SOM. The computer game prizes indeed cost nothing, just a download, and a free credit or two is nothing compared to the amount of money made by SOM from credits spent to participate in the second tier tournament.

The company seemed to be moving to a more enlightened approach to customer service with the ascendancy of Hal's son to
CEO, but this just seems petty, ill-advised and downright stupid by SOM.

Exactly.

I have one request for next year: Do not allow the selected ballpark to be changed after the draft runs. Currently, anyone who chooses a ballpark from a grouping that has already been used gets to choose again - AFTER they have seen the ballparks and rosters selected by the rest of the league. A manager should not be rewarded for making a mistake.

Further, managers should not be required to check again which ballparks are in use once the draft runs. Waiver/free agent choices are made in part based on what other teams are doing. At a minimum, the rest of the league should be notified when a ballpark is changed if the current practice of allowing a switch continues.