 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Calgary & Edmonton & Vancouver
| Topic: Looking for a partner for the Calgary tourney |
| ||
|
Hey, My partner bailed on me, so I'm know looking for a partner for semi-pro doubles and a partner for open doubles. I'd prefer to play forward. Shoot me an email @ ted.archibald@gmail.com or call me @ 306-537-4629 |
Posted: Jun 1 2010 3:55PM
| ||
|
I know some other edmonton guys need semi partners and probably open partners too, take a good look at playing with Ted. He is a good forward, nice 5 and 3. We have played eachother twice In singles and I think both went to meat ball. |
| ||
|
I played with Ted at Nationals in Edmonton and I can attest that he is a VERY strong forward. Probably one of the strongest SemiPro forwards in Andy & Brian's ranking list. Anyone decent playing with Ted will do very well in this tournament. btw... I'm the partner that bailed after finding out that my rank had changed.  |
| ||
|
I have no idea of what the recent results are, but has Barry ever won a semi-pro event? There's a bunch of Pro's who I doubt could win a semi-pro event and a bunch of semi-pro's who couldn't win a rookie event. If they are that good, let them kick the snot out of everyone for a tournament and then move them up. You should know how to win before you're a pro. Unless promaster is the new pro, pro the new semi, etc... Is it because Barry has played in the States that he is a pro? Anyway, I haven't played in a tourney in 3 years, maybe I'm just out of touch. |
| ||
|
yup. I think the rankings on the list are screwed up for sure. |
| ||
|
Barry finished 4th in Open Singles at the Calgary event last year, I don't think that any other semi-pro players have any results that good. For the record I have never won a semipro event either - and have never finished that high in open singles. Obviously no ranking system is going to be perfect, if you ask everyone reading this board to make a list of who is "pro" who is "semi" and who is "rookie" we would not get one list the same as other peoples. Keep in mind that guys like Darcy and Des (who have been playing for about a year) are bumped up to semi-pro now, and really the entire semipro division is made up of relatively new players for the most part. |
| ||
|
"Barry finished 4th in Open Singles at the Calgary event last year, I don't think that any other semi-pro players have any results that good." Actually better, Check out past COFC/Foozapalooza/Edmonton/Calgary results and you will see some SP's placing 4th or better in Open singles and doubles. I think if you keep moving guys up to a level they feel they can't compete in and you will only lose players. Not to mention the limited number of events to play in. I don't blame Barry for not comming. He has to drive 7 - 8 hours or fly in for the tournament to play in two events? Check out this thread. http://www.saskfoos.com/view_topic.asp?ParentID=39159&x=41&domain=SAS&searchterm=cofc+results |
| ||
|
That thread proves my point perfectly, none of the players are semi's now. You quoted me saying "i don't think that any other semi-pro players have any results that good." I didn't say in the past players that were ranked semi pro finishing that good, I meant players still in semi pro now - because that is who he would be competing against if he played in semi pro now. He wouldn't be playing against guys that used to be semi pro... If you can tell me that someone else in semi-pro has results like that then I think they should be bumped up to pro. The only person I can think of is Ben, who finished 2nd in Open Doubles last tournament. I think a couple of exceptions are in play there, one being that it was on warrior, the other being that he had a really good partner  I don't think any other semipro players have placed in the money in open before, and if they have they probably aren't semi pro players. There are plenty of pro players that don't place in the money in open, so if semi's can do it then I think it is time to move on. |
| ||
|
"I think if you keep moving guys up to a level they feel they can't compete in and you will only lose players. Not to mention the limited number of events to play in. I don't blame Barry for not comming. He has to drive 7 - 8 hours or fly in for the tournament to play in two events? " This part I agree with 100%. I am in the same boat as Barry except for the drive time. If Barry did come and went 2 and out in both events that would feel like a wasted trip. Still if Barry is ranked semi that would mean about 20 other pro's should be moved down to semi in my opinion. |
| ||
|
Here is the results from the tournament you linked: Semi-Pro Doubles - 15 Teams 1st place: Matt Botros & Eric Goodman - $370 2nd place: Fred Quan & Barry Willick - $200 3rd place: Jeff Schneider & Paul Gee - $120 Those players ranks at the upcoming calgary tournament, Matt and Eric - Pro Master Fred Jeff and Paul - Pro Barry.... he is in good company in that list. |
| ||
|
you guys are so cute together |
| ||
|
The only people out of those results who have done anything since are the people who won, as far as I can tell. |
| ||
|
Will wrote: "we would not get one list the same as other peoples." That would be wrong. Being totally and completely lazy I would copy somebody else's list. Simon: winning is not the best measure of rank either. There are lots of people who have great skills but, for whatever reason, don't win at any level. You can't hold them at a lower level X until they pull their head game out of their behind - that would be unfair to the players who belong in ranking X. |
| ||
|
Certainly rankings are always an issue. Maybe Quinn hit the nail on the head and under the newest rankings used, a previous rookie is now a semipro, a previous semi is now a pro and a previous pro is now a pro-master. I know that ever since i was moved up to the "pro" rank that it's certainly alot harder for me to justify the cost of travelling for only open singles and open doubles (2 events). Previously, i played as a semi and had 4 events to enter. I will still attend current tourneys, but now i use the trip as a quick getaway trip with the girlfriend aswell. My trip certainly isnt focused on foosball anymore... because trying to fill my weekend with 2 events is tough to do. Especially double knockout. Maybe a change to the double knockout format would solve this problem and for some of us. (ie) travelling 7-8 hours would feel more "worth while". I know that when we run our weekly DYP's we run a round robin format and then a single knockout playoff round. That way, there's no 2 and outs for anyone. Everyone gets alot of games and it seems to work well for our guys in Regina. This is why i really liked how Will Stranks ran the Nationals in Edmonton last year. I liked the roundrobin pool system used. I got the chance to play more games and the payouts worked a little better that way. He paid out for highest ranking rookie, semipro, pro etc. I guess i'm suggesting that I just want to play foos and the more event options i would have, the more likely i am to attend. I think others may have similar feelings. |
| ||
|
Sorry Ted. Looks like i contributed to the highjacking of your thread.  Hope you find a partner for semi-pro! |
| ||
|
you know, I give up. Lets continue the way it is. Only two events for the pros and keep moving people up. Unless of course there are a couple of exceptions. |
| ||
|
First off, as the name of the thread is a partner search, here's the plug: Somebody needs to pick up Ted, he's a strong player and will be in the mix in semi with anybody that he partners with. Alright now to the other issue. Somewhere along the line this new Pro-Master rank seems to have sprung up. Will could answer better, but I think it was a solution to a problem of ranking teams for Nationals so that the round robin pools would be more evenly distributed. Will? This new division seems to have changed the expectations of what a rookie/semi/pro skills are. People that were semi's are being called pros and people that were rookies are being called semis. Of course there are exceptions to this, it's a generalization, but I think overall we've seen a shift in the skill levels required for each rank. Here's the question, are we happy with how the rankings are broken down? We could scrap the pro-master rank and bump some current pros back to semi. And some current semi's back to amateur. Not everyone will like this, but I think it would make the different divisions more competitive. We would have issues with who gets bumped where, but we're having those issues now. Plus people who aren't playing because they don't feel competitive in their current rank might be drawn into coming back. Another option would be to add pro events, pro/master dyps, city vs. city events etc. in order to make the tournaments more pro-friendly. Anybody else have ideas? (Andy/Brian your opinions would be very useful since you are the TDs). CHEERS |
| ||
|
I think the point about each rank being moved up is partially right, the only difference is that instead of all the "semi-pro" players having events they are now called "pro" and don't have extra events to play in. When I made the pro master rank it was for seeding purposes, and I didn't think it would cause this many issues. I like the idea of having pro/master draws or other things along the lines of what Eric said. If Brian/Andy decide to do that i think people would enjoy the addition, but as a tournament director I know how scary it is thinking about not being able .to finish on time. I am not sure what the numbers look like for attending this one... I think there is going to be 8 tables. I think moving people down or reranking would cause the same issues we have now. There is certainly a number of players in the "pro" category that havn't won lately though. I know the reason brian moved up players from rookie to semi was the same as the reason I did it in the first place. If we get newer players into the game they show up to play in "rookie" category. They aren't coming back ever if they have to play against someone that can pass and score on them virtually every time. If people get moved to semi once they have placed once or twice in rookie then the newer players play against each other. |
| ||
|
There are a lot of really good points here. Ranking has always been such a pain in the ass issue; especially for the Tournament Directors. Without a national ranking system that is accurate, it will continue to be an ongoing issue and to create an objective national ranking system is almost impossible. The reason is that for a national ranking system to work, there has to be ample inter-region play, which we just don’t have. Individual cities in Saskatchewan, Alberta, and BC have all successfully employed ranking systems that work well for their region, but are impossible to relate to each other. There have been attempts at a National system that have never taken off for exactly the reasons stated above. I honestly don’t see this ever changing. In 2001 I was ranked as a SemiPro. Since then my skill level has increased dramatically, but so have many of players around me including the people who were Pro back in 2001. Back in 2002 when we were attempting to figure out what ranking our Saskatoon players were in advance of the first COFC tournament, some Alberta players and TD’s got involved and offered the following opinion that was widely accepted and what we used for the tournament. (August 2002) … if you have these qualifications then you are SemiPro. 1. Ability to pass in a series from 5 bar to 3 bar. 2. Ability to play forward with 1 shot that is approached and executed, the same every time. 3. Knowledge of some 5 bar defense, ie: Bait and take away. as opposed to staying still 4. Some ability to play as a goalie. ie: basic knowledge of roll over defense and pull defense, again not standing still. Ability to clear the ball. As for Rookie: … most would agree a rookie is someone fairly new to the game, that has not developed a shot or a pass, or a sense of where the ball is going when shot, or where it is coming from when shot upon. Basically not consistant with their shots or defense. Doesn’t the above description of a “SemiPro” sound like what we would call an Amateur today? … and doesn’t the “Rookie” description sound more like today’s “Novice”? Unfortunately, I don’t ever recall contributions that outlined what a “Pro” was. Ultimately, my rank doesn’t mean much to me other than to determine what events I get to play in. For those that are newly ranked Pro and don’t feel very competitive, this can be a real impediment to traveling very far for a tournament with limited events for them. For this reason, like Paul Gee and others that I have talked to, I’m a huge fan of a round-robin format feeding into a draw similar to what Will ran at Nationals. That type of format gave everyone an opportunity to play numerous matches against all skill levels and awarded those that placed highest overall for their (subjective) ranks. That way, the subjectivity of a players ranking doesn’t have as significant an impact as it does now. Also, because of the way that a Round Robin keeps all the tables busy, more matches are played in a shorter amount of time. This would allow for running of specialty events like Forward Shootout and Goalie Wars and even an “Amateur” draw. Just my 2 cents. |
| ||
|
Your telling me Simon, Everyboby is getting bumped up way to quick, pretty soon there wont any Semis left. And Rookies that have a year of exp will be Semis? I think that, get 10 Pros together, sit the *bleep* down ang talk about each players skills and achievements before they get bumped up by just one or two guys opinion, thats how me and Jason Bellhuemer ran tourneys ten years ago, worked fine !!!! I feel sorry for Semis that got bumped to pro, when their not pro's yet! why would they want to pay more money to play in an event that they have a very slim chance to win any kind of money. that list of rankings is so off, its not funny. would us pro's play in pro master( USA Ranking ) only, if we got bumped? not to mention the travel and entry fees. Anyways, No Dam communication, AGAIN! |
| ||
|
Actually ivor for the ranking list I got 7 or 8 different people to rate players between 1 and 10 and then I averaged it out to make the categories. I didn't even put in a vote I just averaged out other peoples ranks. There was people from each region included in ranking. Theree have been a few changes since then, but I think I am the only semi that has been moved to pro since the ranking list was made. I don't think we need to have a vote on that, I am just willing to pay the extra money to play in less events. |
| ||
|
Ivor, I think I have this thing all figured out. The semis pros didn't get bumped up to pro, most of the pros got bumped down to semi. They just re-named it (Will stated in a previous post that about 20 of the players on the old pro list should have been bumped down to semi). The promaster division was the previous pro division. The down side is the old semis that are now called pro have to pay more to enter, they can only play in two events and have to play against the promasters. The old semis really took one on the chin. The upside is that the players that have only been playing for a year are now called semi pros. This level of accomplishment keeps there intrest in the game and they are all very happy about there new rank. They play in there events isolated from the pros and can enter open if they want. This is a great thing for the new players until they are moved to pro in a few more months. |
| ||
|
One more thing. For last years tournament Brian stated "Any player who would be considered a mid semi or higher under the previous classification are considered pro. Beginners ,rookie and low semi are non pro. Jack H, Paul G, Mike ,Roger,Lance, Chris D, Ben, Rick K, Tim W, Craig W ,David A etc are considered pro. Any questions on players send me an e-mail to calgaryfoos@hotmail.com. I may need to confer with the local clubs to get feedback on a player." Thats beacause the tournament had only Pro and No pro divisions. They did add a semi pro doubles. I think the semis were allowed to play in that event. Will's raking was for his tournament. And with the round robin format it didn't really matter what you were ranked. You still played the same amount of games. It only affected the seeding of the pools and your entry fee. |
| ||
|
Roger, Tim, Jack, and Paul were not allowed to play semi-pro at that event. The rankings now are standardized for Brian/Andy tournaments and for EFL events. Again these ranks were a compilation of many peoples votes and accurately represent players viewpoints as closely as possible. I still think having a point system would be best because it would not leave anything up to subjective opinions. |
| ||
|
The skill level will have to be assessed properly in a nationally agreed manner to appoint a proper Rated Point level for the new or old player getting involved in weekly D.Y.P's or local/regional tournys. I can only see handi-caps as a positive thing for mostly newer players getting involved in the local Table soccer scene. Somewhere someone will need to offer some teaching to the keeners willing to put in the table time to advance beyond the Beginner level. I know the Vancouver players had used handi-caps before , I wonder how many new players became regulars to their weekly events? |
| ||
|
You have two seperate issues. 1) Ranking Players appropriately 2) Enticing Players to come out from differant regions to participate. Why do people want to be ranked into lower categories? To play more, win a trophy, make money? I think that part of the problem may be that every Rank above Amateur (maybe even rookie) wants to make money in their own division. I think they are being unrealistic. There just isn't enough players who are willing to spend money with marginal chances of any return. So lower the financial commitment to enter the lower Ranks, let the obvious Rookies and Am's pay minimal entries to play for a Trophy, maybe only for first. They get to compete with little cost to both operator and themselves and they have a chance to bring home chrome. If there is no money in Rookie and Am and you don't care to win a trophy you more or less are a Semi or Pro anyway. Let most play in the Semi events at a set price for all non-pro's with money back for 3rd - extra for 1st,2nd. Players should be interested in the competition aspect first and foremost if they want to get better, if they want to make money they are in the wrong sport. By giving the players little benefit to being in Rookie or Am they will want to move up, the real Rookies and Am's will appreciate the fight for a trophy. The Rookies and Am's then can spend money on a Semi event if they didn't get enough foos or if they want to risk a chance they play well and win some cash. The draw to play should be playing differant players under pressure. The Players who are Pro have usually been Pro for years and are used to playing in only a few events, besides most are old and decrepid and can't play more than a couple events without a physio therapist anyway so leave them be.... Make sure your Pro's are Pro's. Master.. put them in the Canadian Foosball Hall of fame and treat them like Pro's otherwise. A Pro-Am dyp is a good event to give Pro's another event. As for ranks, years ago we had a national system but local areas didn't want their tournaments entered because the seperate player bases were worried they would be moved up and lose out. Now we see that by not using the Elo system we have had available for years is causing it's own problems. I think all areas should enter their tournaments into a national system and the larger tournaments coupled with traveling players will help make it all relevant. With Elo it should work itself out so that everyone can feel good about their ranking as long as tournaments are entered. When you leave the rankings to subjective opinions there will always be people who feel they are hard done by. CTSA used to have an online tournament Elo system, it should be resurrected and used. One of Mary Moore's ways of getting lots of people out to her tournaments is to rank most players lower than they are so they can enter more events. You play more but have a harder time winning. Just a few thoughts, cheers |
| ||
|
I did a little searching for the old sites and they have expired but maybe Eric Dunn still reads the board, he overlooked the CTSA system and maybe has a copy of the software. I only entered tournaments. |
| ||
|
It would be nice to see if Eric Dunn can weigh in on this topic |
| ||
|
As far as im concerned, the REAL PRO MASTERS are the Canadian players that are ranked Pro Master in the USA, Ex: Eric D, Kane G , Mario A, Moya T, and who ever else i missed, the rest of us are just Pros, some Pros are better than others because they have been simply playing alot more Foos recently than other Pros. ex: Matt B, Darrel P, Eric G, Ang K, Perfect example is Brian Leoppky, Hes alot better now, simply because hes been playing in alot more Tourneys in Canada and the US. that doesnt make him a Pro Master, just one of the the Better Pros. Matt Botros beat some Pro Masters in the US in Singles, i guess that makes him a ProMaster now. I GIVE UP! |
The last post to this thread is more than 30 days old.