Suggestions for standard major league PB

[Wadidiz]

I tend to like the parts of all major sports where the clock is putting pressure on one side or the other to turn the game around. To me that's much more interesting than "Let's just take it easy and see where they go."

In any case, some of the suggestions were more down-the-road perhaps. Perhaps the time bonuses can be phased in over a couple of seasons or made progressive the further you get in the tournament, i.e. give time bonuses in the quarter, semi and finals. There you have teams playing their peers.

Here is a revised list for the more immediate future:

1. 7-minute games for 7-player; 5 for 5, 10 for 10.
2. Center flag
3. 2 points for a flag hang.
4. 1 point for first pull.
5. 1 point for tie/draw.
7. No elimination points, no armbands to count.
8. Netted-in area is playing field; deadbox or judges boxes clearly marked as out-of-bounds. No boundary lines to watch out for.
9. (Future development: timer connected to button and buzzer that player slams with flag to mark time and indicate a flag hang.)
10. Penalties will be recorded on scoresheets to break possible ties. For the purposes of tie-breaking each 1-4-1 will reduce the score by 0.25 points, each 2-4-1 by 0.5 points and each 3-4-1 or player suspension will reduce the score by 0.75 points. (Or whatever seems reasonable).
11. Give some kind of time bonus in the semis and finals.

 

[Beaker]

OK - here's a question.

Trauma won 6 straight NPPL's and are/were widely regarded as one of the best teams around.

Would they have still won those 6 events with time based scoring? Would Strange be doing as well as they are with time based scoring

I don't mind small time bonuses, but not time based scoring, would eliminate a whole aspect of the game at a stroke.

 

[Robbo]

Steve, with all due respect, it ain't down to you to initiate any rule changes that favour a particular style, I agree with Beaker and Duff here, it's the height of arrogance to impose upon teams a mandate that, in effect, penalises a certain style.
One of the greatest attractions to boxing has always been the traditional clash of the boxer with the fighter or the puncher with the counter-puncher.
It is outright madness to rob paintball of one its birthright styles just because YOU think we should all adopt a more aggressive approach.
You have had this job for five minutes Steve, take a back seat on revolution, nobody's calling for it, and you ain't the one to instigate it.

Pull yer neck back in Steve, get on with running the pathetic excuse for X-Ball we have and stick to what you were employed to do.......organise X-Ball !

 

[duffistuta]

Great thing about

Run-thrus are that they are often unexpected and can turn a game, and demand guts and timing...to legislate in such a way as to make em almost mandatory takes away from the skill needed to pull them off properly and also removes the excitement. It's like watching an England game knowing Beckham's going to go for a top corner curler every single time.

And like someone else said, who's to say that a clinical takedown with some awesome snap-shooting and a sharp gameplan isn't every bit as impressive as a 40-second run thru?

Variety is the spice of, er , Paintball...think it's was Lao Tzu who said that, but it may havde been Martin Luther King. I forget...

 

[Wadidiz]

I have made it clear that I put forth these suggestions as a private person. Isn't a forum all about putting forth and debating ideas? As long as I have the privilege of using this forum then I will exercise my freedom.

Thanks for the career advice, Robbo

 

[duffistuta]

Why does anything need to be done? Who says we're not evolving fine?

I agree with some of what Wad says, just not that...

 

[duffistuta]

To continue...

Word is both major leagues have got TV sniffing around, we have two distinct tournament formats both of which players rave about, we've got a sport we love playing and that in under 20 years has erupted into a huge industry.

Why the rush to change? What exactly is so broke it needs fixing?

 

[Wadidiz]

Originally posted by duffistuta
Why does anything need to be done? Who says we're not evolving fine?

I agree with some of what Wad says, just not that...

And I'm not even sure I agree with Wad. I just thought there were some interesting points in some of the ideas that we (including Nick) came up with. I certainly would not be in favor of cramming a style down someone's throat that didn't want it. You know that no major league is going to risk throwing out something tried and true for something that doesn't clearly have a wide range of acceptance.

But some of the points that come up in such discussion probably should be implemented pretty quickly.

While we're talking about reform, what is obviously needed the most is a rules/judging/tournament organization system that improves the quality of judging by rewarding good judging and penalizing poor judging. That's is being looked at and worked on right now in the Mill organization.

We must make sure all the judges know the rules and apply them evenly and consistently and there must be clear supervision of the performance of judges under the definite possibility of losing points. Every field must handle all the details uniformly at every tournament. The standards for all the important details must be met or exceeded.

Gladly expectations are increasing because of competition. New developments like X-ball and increased public exposure by Pure Promotions bring a need to look at everything in PB in a different light.

Steve

 

[duffistuta]

>>>While we're talking about reform, what is obviously needed the most is a rules/judging/tournament organization system that improves the quality of judging by rewarding good judging and penalizing poor judging. That's is being looked at and worked on right now in the Mill organization.

We must make sure all the judges know the rules and apply them evenly and consistently and there must be clear supervision of the performance of judges under the definite possibility of losing points. Every field must handle all the details uniformly at every tournament. The standards for all the important details must be met or exceeded. <<<

Now that, I think we all agree on.

 

[Robbo]

Hmmm...

Originally posted by Nick Brockdorff
PETE, DUFFI, BEAKER:
What do YOU think needs to be done, to make our sport more appealing to media and general audiences ?
Easy to shoot down ideas - difficult to come up with them !

Personally I honestly believe shorter, actionpacked games is the answer - and then a simpler points system.
The boxing analogy is fine - but lets be honest - would the general audience rather watch a superb definsive counterpuncher, or a raging bull type knock out artist ?
And then.... why is boxing relevant ? - it has very little in common with paintball as it is an individual sport, an olympic sport, an old sport - a sport that has attracted the masses for decades.... while we in paintball are struggling to even get our best mates to watch us !
All in good spirit !
Nick

Nick, it's easy to shoot down ideas if you have no brain, but if you counter ideas with a reasoned argument, then what's the problem ?

As for what needs to be done ?
Well, you can shorten the game time but you still have to uphold style differentials.
As soon as you reward aggressive styles and thereby penalise counter-punch / technical styles, you immediately restrict the playing of paintball to one less dimension.
You can argue all you like who the crowd might like to see with regard to a brawl or a boxing match, and short term I agree, the thirst for a blood bath would prevail but long term, a more sophisticated and comprehensive competition will always be more attractive.
The Ali v Frazier was a classic clash of styles as was Ali v Foreman, it's no accident that some of the greatest fights we have ever witnessed were due to a clash of 'styles'.
The boxing metaphor is wholly applicable in this sense Nick, the fact there are just two opponents is academic, it is the general principle of style cashes that is being highlighted here not a direct similarly between the sports.

Let's take things easy here, there is no need for a mad rush for God’s sake.
The Millennium board have made far too many hastily reached decisions so far and then had to back track, let’s not give them any more reasons to duplicate such asinine behaviour.

Nick - Peace my Friend