Barnstormers 2020 - expanded Semi-Finals now with Prizes

Damn right! We need some new blood. Some of these guys are old. I mean really really old.

The Barnstormers Tour is supposed to be a test of skill which must be balanced against keeping players from dropping out if they are not faring well.

Here is my proposal.

The top 10 finishers during the regular tour seasons get their ticket punched straight to the finals.

Then you have three quarter finals events of 24 teams each and the 6 managers who advance to the finals of those events make it into the semifinals.

They then play a 12-team semi final with the managers seeded 11-16 in the regular season standings joining the six finalists from the quarterfinals. The finalists of the semi's then advance to the BS Finals.

This approach gives everyone a shot at the finals but weights the odds of getting a finals berth in favor of those who did well throughout the tour. Should keep interest in the tour going as 72 managers get to play in the quarters but also rewards the skill of the players who performed well throughout the tour.

Anyone who has played the game for a while knows that playoffs are a crapshoot. This approach allows the dice to be rolled while still placing a premium on managerial skill. The way it is now the manager who finishes 10th in the regular season tour has the same chance of making the finals as the manager who squeaks into the semi's by finishing 81st. Again, if it skill that the tour attempts to measure, my proposal gets the job done.

The top 10 finishers during the regular season get their ticket punched straight to the finals.

Then you have three quarter finals events of 24 teams each and the 6 managers who advance to the finals of those events make it into the semifinals.

They then play a 12-team semi final with the managers seeded 11-16 in the regular season standings joining the six finalists from the quarterfinals. The finalists of the semi's then advance to the BS Finals.

Best paradigm heard yet. Strikes the balance. And in a less important way, satisfies my preference at least for symmetric logic.

The top 10 finishers during the regular season get their ticket punched straight to the finals.

Then you have three quarter finals events of 24 teams each and the 6 managers who advance to the finals of those events make it into the semifinals.

They then play a 12-team semi final with the managers seeded 11-16 in the regular season standings joining the six finalists from the quarterfinals. The finalists of the semi's then advance to the BS Finals.

Best paradigm heard yet. Strikes the balance. And in a less important way, satisfies my preference at least for symmetric logic.

This is the best idea I've heard yet. Fair, and and as the Quark-Meister said , balanced.

Thanks for all the great suggestions. Our tour is already set in stone for 2020 but the board and I will be giving a hard look at everything posted here for the 2021 tour.

Thanks 1Can1 but I guess you didn't read this whole thread through completely. The reason for the change to 24 team leagues for the semi-finals was to keep interest up for a tour that has now ballooned from 150 to 230+ players. Otherwise 80% of the players see that they cannot get anywhere near the "Top 57" and bail out. Now you're proposing cutting those advancing back down to 45. - Your suggestion makes things worse, not better.

Hi 1Can1, that is a valid point theoretically. But the tour has run for quite a while, and it is data, not blind presumption, that does indeed show participation wanes toward the latter part of the tour from the bottom third or so of the standings.
It isn't everyone--many of us would continue playing if we had no mathematical chance simply for good competition, as you alluded.

But it isn't a singular objective of keeping interest or maintaining fairness to top finishers--it is all of it.This year is set, but every year there are incremental improvements made based on the data. As you can see from having read the thread, there are many competing interests and ideas, including yours.

All in all, the playoffs, as Druid said, are a crapshoot. Getting there consistently is most attributable to skill constructing teams. But winning championships requires a lot of things to go right that are related to skill, but not as directly over a short series.

Either way, I know I'm confident the tour will continue to adapt. It is also a very positive thing to have as leverage, of sorts, when lobbying SOM to address certain things.

The Barnstormers Board stood by and watched over a multi-week period while the number of participants passed 175, passed 200, passed 225, until the number of participants reached a level about 40% higher than last year. There was no outreach to the Barnstormers community about how the Semi-finals and Finals should be organized. There was just an unilateral announcement that there would be three 24-team Semi Finals leagues providing finishers #10 and #81 with the same chance to reach the Finals.

Its very strange to me that the activists on this Site were able to marshal torches and pitchforks against the Game Company about selecting the appropriate ATG9 radio button which required minimal level of understanding and moving the cursor a few inches. In contrast, there have been few complaints about the unilateral decision on how the Barnstormers tournament will be conducted.

In the end, 24 more players than before will have something to look forward to after 6 tough rounds. And ALL of them will get to play that Semi-Final for free with the free credit for everyone advancing. That PLUS the Windows SOM game for all those reaching the WS in their Semi-Final. That's 6 more physical prizes than existed in 2019. All of this is negotiated with SOM and it doesn't come easy.

Yeah 2 players withdrew over it but it could have been worse. Tough decisions have to be made but the board and I do send emails to each other and discuss what they think is best for the tour. Just like their vote on whether to use the (then) default set or the ALL ERAS. Rather than quickly decide on my own, I called an Emergency Vote. I'm pleased that we had a role in reversing an unpopular debut to ATG9, no matter which side you were on.

I looked back through my records and I find we go back to at least 2005. Probably undocumented a few more years before that. I have always wanted to maintain the CORE of Barnstormers and only make steps in tweaking things for the better. And if you've been around long enough, you may remember when we went straight to the Finals. The Semi-Finals was created as the participants grew. And for a few years now, we've been able to play that Semi-Finals for free.

The Board and I (particularly Mr Baseball World) were instrumental in the continued development of a Live Draft App that finally mimics the functionality of Diamond Dope. Countless hours of testing finally achieved all that we wanted. It's solid enough to make optional live draft leagues for the 140 and 200 Mil events.

I read all of the suggestions made here and I know the board members do stop in and read them. And of course there is always a wide variety of opinions. As far as Finalists getting that bye, I believe that it's such a tough road to get there that we don't want to decrease those numbers. So the only topic that I will consider will be what future changes (if any) will be made for the Semi-Finals.

Maybe our numbers will get back to the previous levels when we look at 2021. It's possible that we can get back to 12 team semi-finals. But - so far with all of the changes that ATG9 has brought with repricing and long requested bullpen changes, this is shaping up to be one of the most challenging and highly anticipated thing that many of us look forward to on a daily basis. - Stay safe and may the ball bounce in your favor.

The Barnstormers Board stood by and watched ...

Understood, but there is a key difference between SOM and the BS board. One group we pay in order to patronize its service. The other group is comprised of volunteers who also pay to patronize the same service.

BLUF: It took a massive upwelling of influence from paying customers, out in the open, in order to undo a change that was influenced by a few behind the scenes. That is strange to me.

SOM made an unannounced change--without checking with the community--to a product/service we pay for. And it was impacting how that service was provided. Just because you or I didn't have trouble moving over a few pixels and reading, doesn't change the fact that the unannounced change created a binary set of leagues that weren't filling. That's the reality. So yes, pitchforks came out--though I don't agree with the implication of the analogy if I read you right.

So to emphasize, yeah, pitchforks come out when an exceedingly small group of fellow customers determine the player pool prices--and then somehow there is a change to the business model in how I interact with a product I pay for, which affected league formation. Clutching my pearls here--without outreach to the community by the game company--that I pay my money to.
Then it takes a massive upwelling of influence from paying customers, out in the open, in order to undo change that was influenced by a few behind the scenes. Now that is strange to me.

If you don't see the difference, then we are at an impasse.

The tourney is an add-on--it provides an outlet we pay nothing extra for, and I think since its first rendition the facts show unequivocally a voluntary event that has grown in scope. It may be because it is something people want to participate in. We can at least rule out that it grew because it sucked.

Cheers and Be Well,
Pitchfork Paco