|
|
Post by Matt Wiggins on Jul 9, 2012 21:31:19 GMT -5
i posted this thread last night on the cawf forum, but i know this board get tonnes of traffic so i posted here as well.
just throwing this out there to see what people think.
what are some of the different formats of doing an armwrestling tournament? any ideas should have some pros and cons.
one idea i came up with was a round robin style event sort of a hybrid between a standard run event and based on the toronto iron man event that just pasted.
there would be no set weight classes, eg. the 5 or 6th closest to weigh to each other would be grouped together.
say 20 guys show up, $50 an arm, that would be 4 weight classes, everyone pulls each other in their own class once, winner takes $200, 2nd gets $50, 3rd gets whatever(giftcard from donating merchant?)
this would be great for novices as well so they get to pull some of the best (close to their weight)and everyone gets at least 4 or 5 pulls not just 2.
you would not have to worry if 10 guys show up in the 199 class as this would be broken down into 2 classes.
the organizer would have less worry about lets say if only 1 guy showed up in the 154 class as he would be rounded up to his closest competitors. any ties at the end would settled with a tie breaker match, and maybe the winners from each class could go against each other.i would like to see some new ideas and maybe something new to come to the standard canadian armwrestling tournament scene.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marc Vachon on Jul 10, 2012 12:31:56 GMT -5
Hey Matt, I like the idea. Especially the idea of people pay in, and the top three get the earnings of their class distributed based on a percentage. The con I guess would be if not many people show up to a tournament, or the distribution of weight for those that do show up is skewed significantly. I like the idea of pulling more. The Arm Melter coming up here in Ontario is a great example of a fun tournament. Triple elimination, along with the Super matches in advance. Cash prizes. Cannot complain.  |
|
|
|
Post by Rob Hancock on Jul 11, 2012 9:28:07 GMT -5
Hey Matt, I hate the idea of a tournament with no weigh classes. This format would be more appropriate for an overall, not a tournament. It puts too much power into the hands of the tournament directors/scorkeepers. Triple elimination is another format I hate. A puller that loses their first two matches would have to pull a lot of matches to eliminate all the B & C bracket pullers. The undefeated A side puller will be fresh for the final match and the B side challenger will be gassed and have no chance. Armwrestling is a power sport, not an endurance event. Even supermatches have gone from being best of three to best of five and now most are six?
|
|
|
|
Post by Matt Wiggins on Jul 11, 2012 11:16:49 GMT -5
thanks rob. the issue with weight classes is that they would always be changing, depending on who shows up. most of the time you would be still pullng the same pullers as usual because most people would stay roughly the same weight.
the tournament directors/scorkeepers have no power when it comes to the tournament, the results will always come down to how well the puller pulls.the weights for every competitor would be posted for everyone to see. i was looking at some previous results and counted the amout of different pullers, ranges anywhere from 25-45 and most tournaments have 4 weight classes. under my idea there would end up with 5-9 classes with an even amount in each(hopefully).i would think that there would be more matches overall aswell, 2 tables would be needed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marc Vachon on Jul 11, 2012 13:29:40 GMT -5
Sorry to hear you don't like the triple elimination Rob. The idea of an extra chance at a win is what's exciting, especially for new pullers in the sport. Going two and out for $20-$30 doesn't seem like a lot of fun. And if you're losing your first two matches, you and the other guy in the final bracket are probably at a similar level. That's what makes it all the more exciting for the new guy, or for the person that isn't elite now, or ever, but just loves pulling. And even for those guys that are elite can get a bad draw, it's great to know you have another chance to get back in the tournament. Hope here is what the triple elimination brings. In addition, having those super matches @ the beginning of the tournament is exciting. I honestly think there should be ranking super matches at the beginning of every tournament. Sure, the format can be debated (Best of 3 or 5 or 7) and how many (1, 2, 3 ranking super matches) but it's totally primitive and raw to have two guys facing each other fresh over a couple of rounds. Finally, the purity of any sport will get degraded as you attempt to find ways to grow the sport. However, endurance is a major part of competitive arm wrestling regardless, it's simply not just power. Say you have 10 guys in your class even if it IS double elimination. You'll need endurance to win that class. Let's not get lost in the idea of purity. If power is all you think armwrestling is, then eliminate the toproll, and start in a hook every match, and it's only EVER super matches & single elimination. Power vs Power.... wait, but then you could lose because the guy is faster... And I'm not trying to be a d!ck here. Just laying out that armwrestling isn't solely a power sport. No sport is only ONE thing. Matt, have your tried out your tournament format? I think if you forget about trophies/medals and focus in on cash prizes alone, it could be successful. |
|
|
|
Post by Matt Wiggins on Jul 11, 2012 19:21:09 GMT -5
no marc, i just came up with this idea. i'm not really in a good enough location to be putting one on. yes this would be a money tournament only as to keep the up front costs down for the event organizer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob Hancock on Jul 12, 2012 9:46:10 GMT -5
Hey Marc, thanks for explaining armwrestling to me, I value your years of experience. You can continue to promote this type of event, but it will never fly here in Ontario! I do however love the idea of having ranking matches at the beginning of every tournament.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marc Vachon on Jul 12, 2012 14:26:58 GMT -5
Rob, you're welcome.
Matt, I think it's worth a try if you ever get the shot to do it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason Manjin on Jul 14, 2012 14:38:28 GMT -5
I like the idea. Not breaking the weights up may discourage new pullers. Other than that, sounds good. Just make it at least triple elimination. Triple elimination is good for new pullers or average pullers as well as for overall experience. If you are a superior puller you will be on the a side and fresh, and that is where you should be and is part of the game whether it is triple or double elimination. If you lose the first 2 matches in triple elim you are still pulling? That has got to be better than on the bench in double elim?
|
|
