Forums

Congrats to the Live Series Qualifiers

• kavvz 2,195 Posts

  Thu, Feb 20 2020 6:19 AM

  birchi:

  Kenher01:

                  Agree it would be nice to see new faces & as you said prob the unlimited format that's the prob but March may see some new faces as from March onwards the Live Series will be New Version only (Not Flash) so i would not be surprised to see Luke & other a few other players, prob be a mix of old faces with new one's

  Maybe an unpopular opinion, but generally I don't really mind not having random players in these fields and see the same familiar faces every time. After all this is an attempt to establish an esports event and for that you'll need recognisable players, not an ever-shifting field.

  Simon, how can that possibly be good for the game?  I get the notion of having the best players play against each other, but where's the intrigue / uncertainty.  There is none with the way it is now.  

  To draw a comparison to something real (I know this is just a game), but why bother having a regular season at all.  MLB should just scrap it all together and just have the Dodgers and Yankess play the World Series every year.  

  Better yet, maybe what they could do is let them have unlimited chances to get through the LCS's so it's always the best against the best.....Eventually, given enough opportunites the Yanks will win the AL and the Dodgers will win the NL.

  Boring.

• DodgyPutter 4,690 Posts

  Thu, Feb 20 2020 7:22 AM

  I think he meant  that  assuming the audience is going to grow beyond the 100's of wgt players that it now is,  having established participants the viewers get to know (and support/dislike or whatever) would help.  Having different people all the time may mean the casual viewer really doesn't care what happens/who wins or how badly others lose.

  I'm not sure if I agree or not but I can see the point, unless there is some build up of interest than this will probably be the only series of these.  Maybe there could be something in between like the top 8....6..? don't have to qualify for the next one and there's a qualifier to take the other places. It would also give another interest (even call it relegation) to the live event itself, rather than just who wins.

  kavvz:

  To draw a comparison to something real (I know this is just a game), but why bother having a regular season at all.  MLB should just scrap it all together and just have the Dodgers and Yankess play the World Series every year.  

  Better yet, maybe what they could do is let them have unlimited chances to get through the LCS's so it's always the best against the best.....Eventually, given enough opportunites the Yanks will win the AL and the Dodgers will win the NL.

  Boring.

  MLB, whether it's basketball or baseball it's a game too :-/

  Anyway if a comparison is needed it seems bizarre not to compare a golf game to the game of golf.  Massive prizes funded by the success it has on television.  How would it be if there were qualifiers for each and every tournament with top players not present at many of them, more exciting? Bigger audiences? It is good to see someone new come through and win but we also want to see our favourites play.

  If the "unlimited chances" is a dig at the unlimited play then I think most on here would like to see that changed, but why would wgt want less ball usage?  I realise I'm in the minority but I think the unlimited helps the chances of us lesser players as the best can usually score within two or three of their best whereas the variation in my scores can go into double figures over 18 holes.

  Precisely what is boring?

• Miantiao 401 Posts

  Thu, Feb 20 2020 8:00 AM

  birchi:

  That said, I think a 2-round setup with one unlimited and one single round would be better because it ensures that you'll have a group of around 20-25 players competing for the spots and don't exclude players like JoeMaverick or Naturali who clearly belong to the top 10 of WGT, but are not willing to mindlessly restart the round over and over again

  20-25 players Simon?

  I'd hazard a guess at saying a hundred or so players would all stand a chance in a single round format.

  We all shoot bad rounds, look at the names on the WD list in ReadyGo tournies.

  Won't play any tournament with an unlimited round, and said so years ago.

   

   

• birchi 1,492 Posts

  Thu, Feb 20 2020 8:45 AM

  DodgyPutter:

  I think he meant  that  assuming the audience is going to grow beyond the 100's of wgt players that it now is,  having established participants the viewers get to know (and support/dislike or whatever) would help.  Having different people all the time may mean the casual viewer really doesn't care what happens/who wins or how badly others lose.

  Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant. I don't see this happening anyway because the game has no inherent entertainment value, but that would be the only possible chance imo. Always a matter of degree of course. You don't want literally the same 10 players every time who combine high skill with the willingness to play hours and hours in an unlimited setting, but neither do you want random people dropping in by chance. That's why I'm in favour of the 2-round (1 unlimited, 1 single) setup.

  Miantiao:

  20-25 players Simon?

  I'd hazard a guess at saying a hundred or so players would all stand a chance in a single round format.

  Yes, that would be my guess for a 2-round setup with one unlimited round because the usual suspects would have the advantage of a (near-)perfect first round score. Pure single play would increase that number, of course. 

  And like you, I'm not participating in these events with unlimited rounds, seems like an even bigger waste of time than playing this game at all already is ;)

• el3n1 4,502 Posts

  Thu, Feb 20 2020 8:47 AM

  birchi:

  That said, I think a 2-round setup with one unlimited and one single round would be better

  Doubt this would change a whole lot... unlimited restarts would still occur in the first round virtually eliminating the vast majority, which may be what they are trying to do.

  I am not sure... but I thought I read the structure combined with the payout structure is part of the deterrent to participation.  It was one of those eye opening post, when I read even you opted to sit out given the structure.  That alone should be a huge wakeup call for a lot of people.

  Even highly skilled players going through the multiple unlimited restarts can essentially lose credits while finishing in the top 20 but failing to qualify for the top 8 where the payouts begin to jump for this event.

  For reasonably minded players who look at time invested, cost to play in ball hit use, and the relatively limited payout... this event virtually ensures 99.9999% of the people who participate are losing credits even attempting.  

  Likewise, there is zero incentive for trying to qualify for the etour event if you don't feel you are strong enough to get through 4 rounds of bracket play where ONLY the top 8 finishers earn anything at all for their participation.  This has even less of an ROI for all those seeking to qualify than the LIVE series which at least has a payout structure beyond the top 8.  

  WGT has cut out the ONE free ball they use to give out, replacing with worthless ball effects, and it appears prizes and payouts continue to scale back.   Doesn't look good for the casual player and it seems even some top players are making tough decisions on when to play or not. 

  Not sure that is good for the game or competition, especially when top players sit out and are not even putting themselves in the mix ... they essentially hand over the top positions to the same people because other top players are also sitting out!

• kavvz 2,195 Posts

  Thu, Feb 20 2020 7:09 PM

  DodgyPutter:

  Anyway if a comparison is needed it seems bizarre not to compare a golf game to the game of golf.  Massive prizes funded by the success it has on television.  How would it be if there were qualifiers for each and every tournament with top players not present at many of them, more exciting? Bigger audiences? It is good to see someone new come through and win but we also want to see our favourites play.

  There are qualifiers for some tournaments i.e. US Amateur for example.  But, they're all single round.  If we use golf to compare this golf game instead of baseball, then that just enforces the single play crowd's point because that's what real golf is.  Same point, but they don't need to run qualifiers for every tournament simply because they are single play.  You don't see the same players in the top 10 of every tournament, but I'd imagine if you gave Rory unlimited tries he would most certainly be at the top every week.   Now maybe some players want that, but personally I'd like to see Corey Conners duke it out with Rory every now and then instead of always seeing Rory, Tiger, Dustin, Jon etc only ever.

  Along the same lines, I'll bet ya if these were single you wouldn't see the same players every time.  Just look at the monthly premium open leaderboard.  Now possibly some haven't played it yet, but that's exciting.  Who's it going to be next month..who knows, but I can list who's going to be in the Live Series next month pretty accurately.  i.e about the same 10 this month and about the same 10 as last month.  

  DodgyPutter:

  If the "unlimited chances" is a dig at the unlimited play then I think most on here would like to see that changed, but why would wgt want less ball usage?  I realise I'm in the minority but I think the unlimited helps the chances of us lesser players as the best can usually score within two or three of their best whereas the variation in my scores can go into double figures over 18 holes.

  I think that's the main stickler behind it -- WGT wants ball hits.  It makes sense, but doesn't mean we can't express our dislike of that format.  

  For me, and I think Ed hit on this but I don't go crazy restart after restart trying to qualify b/c all those ball hits don't make it worthwhile.  If it was single I'd try one time and be done, but since its unlimited the top players will eventually shoot a score I can't attain without endless restarts which I'm not willing to do.  If it was single, I'll bet ya a sleeve those top 10 change each week.  Don't know how we'd ever act on that wager since WGT just won't go single.

  DodgyPutter:

  Precisely what is boring?

  Seeing the same players every time.

• kavvz 2,195 Posts

  Thu, Feb 20 2020 7:15 PM

  birchi:

  DodgyPutter:

  I think he meant  that  assuming the audience is going to grow beyond the 100's of wgt players that it now is,  having established participants the viewers get to know (and support/dislike or whatever) would help.  Having different people all the time may mean the casual viewer really doesn't care what happens/who wins or how badly others lose.

  Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant. I don't see this happening anyway because the game has no inherent entertainment value, but that would be the only possible chance imo. Always a matter of degree of course. You don't want literally the same 10 players every time who combine high skill with the willingness to play hours and hours in an unlimited setting, but neither do you want random people dropping in by chance. That's why I'm in favour of the 2-round (1 unlimited, 1 single) setup.

  I"m sorry, I just can't get behind not wanting random's dropping in by chance.  If they shot a score to qualify, why is that a bad thing?  I think it adds intrigue.  People will look at those 10 and see JerryKnowsGolf12 is playing and think say whaaaaa..?  I think I'm gonna go watch Jerry play some.  

  RE: 1 unlim and 1 single I don't think would change much for reasons already stated.  Unlim's the problem IMO.

• fobby1980 310 Posts

  Thu, Feb 20 2020 7:33 PM

  kavvz:

  birchi:

  DodgyPutter:

  I think he meant  that  assuming the audience is going to grow beyond the 100's of wgt players that it now is,  having established participants the viewers get to know (and support/dislike or whatever) would help.  Having different people all the time may mean the casual viewer really doesn't care what happens/who wins or how badly others lose.

  Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant. I don't see this happening anyway because the game has no inherent entertainment value, but that would be the only possible chance imo. Always a matter of degree of course. You don't want literally the same 10 players every time who combine high skill with the willingness to play hours and hours in an unlimited setting, but neither do you want random people dropping in by chance. That's why I'm in favour of the 2-round (1 unlimited, 1 single) setup.

  I"m sorry, I just can't get behind not wanting random's dropping in by chance.  If they shot a score to qualify, why is that a bad thing?  I think it adds intrigue.  People will look at those 10 and see JerryKnowsGolf12 is playing and think say whaaaaa..?  I think I'm gonna go watch Jerry play some.  

  RE: 1 unlim and 1 single I don't think would change much for reasons already stated.  Unlim's the problem IMO.

  Why doesn’t anybody want to acknowledge the MOST OBVIOUS solution to this?

  4 rounds of single-play, each round with a 5 days window to accommodate the finals. 

  Too bad WGT doesn’t have the balls to set this up (yes, pun intended)

• Miantiao 401 Posts

  Thu, Feb 20 2020 7:38 PM

  kavvz:

  RE: 1 unlim and 1 single I don't think would change much for reasons already stated.  Unlim's the problem IMO.

  I agree.

  The players that stand to give single player tournies a good tilt, after initial outlays moving up the tiers and gaining experience, no longer pay to play, so why incorporate unlimited rounds into competitions for Tour Champion and Champion tournaments?

  Sure there are weekly and monthly single play tournaments, but they're hardly the Virtual US Open, or  Virtual Monthly Major tournaments.

  I'm not going to bore myself attempting a near perfect first round unlimited round in order to be competitive for the single play remaining one or two rounds.

  There are quite a few players that make the cut for the VUSO that won't be competitive.

  The VUSO format should be two single rounds then the cut followed by two more single rounds.

   

   

   

• birchi 1,492 Posts

  Thu, Feb 20 2020 7:48 PM

  fobby1980:

  Why doesn’t anybody want to acknowledge the MOST OBVIOUS solution to this?

  4 rounds of single-play, each round with a 5 days window to accommodate the finals. 

  literally every single post in this thread does...

  kavvz:

  I"m sorry, I just can't get behind not wanting random's dropping in by chance.  If they shot a score to qualify, why is that a bad thing?

  The 'by chance' is the problem I'm having. I think we may have talked past each other a little bit. I'm the biggest opponent of the current setup you'll find out there, having one unlimited round is simply ridiculous.

  I was just opposing a one-round single play qualifier as I thought some suggested here (of course that would never happen anyway) because with the wind-sets not being the same for everyone the results would be majorly skewed. A 4-round single play mode like fobby suggested would be great as it would give more people a shot, but not beyond a still fairly small number of players.