I don't want to lower the number of players for an official tag
round, 7 is just fine.
I think you miss understood what I was proposing.

1. Their would be no change in the 1 tag having to played every 10
days (that is constant).
My assumption is correct. It can not flaw the scoring system at all.

Scenario:
On Wednesday the 1 tag holder (bob) plays against the 4 tag holder
(joe). The 4 tag holder (joe) wins. So they switch tags.
On Thursday they both play in tags, they tie for the lead and the
tie goes to the 1 tag holder (joe). How does this mess up scoring?

thanks
MikeM




--- In FiendsofSedgleyWoods@yahoogroups.com, pwharton1@... wrote:
>
> If all you're contending to play for is what tag you get to enter
with it doesn't seem like the rule you want to adjust. Your
assumption that it won't "mess up the scoring" is flawed when it
comes to ties and what group you get to play in.
>
> If you come in with the 1 and tie the guy with the 2 you get the
one . . .. ?? Ties are always big in a tag system since there's only
one round in our tag events.
>
> Getting to play in the lead group is also a plus for many people.
Playing with guys that are scratching for every stroke it's much
easier to stay focused than the soup and beer centric crowds of the
lower cards. (I know -- I'm generalizing here, please don't give me
the example of the 100+ tagger focusing on cutting a stroke off his
20 over round . . .. I know he's out there but at Sedgley the norm
is much more casual about the score when it comes time to take a
little bench break . . .)
>
> Seems like the rule you want to change is the minimum number of
people required to make a tag round official. That way you do
exactly what you're talking about doing. I don't like it because it
would effect the one tag rule about being thrown in every 10 days --
7 is a good number. Of the 3 or 4 non-Thursday/Saturday/Sunday tag
rounds that I organized this year it was always a challenge to get 7
taggers to agree to play. Lower that number and you'll tempt the
less scrupulous to play their one tag every week versus their 2-3
buddies that they know they could beat. 7 keeps this from happening.
With three regular weekly tag rounds it's tough to think you can't
get a shot at a low tag.
>
> Quite frankly -- Sedgley's system is interesting and changing it
to make it more like DE doesn't make sense.
>
> Why not just buy a DE tag? Many Sedgleyites have them now.
>
> -Wharton
>
>
>
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: m8ymerc1 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
> What do you think about being able to play each other for each
> others particular tag like the DDG does?
>
> Here are my reasons why I think we should be able to.
>
> 1. It would not screw up the scores for the year end winner.
> Why? Because our scores are taken from official tag rounds only,
> it's not what you come in with, instead it's what you leave with.
> Their is nothing to keep track of so it can't mess up the scoring?
>
> 2. I think it would add stiffer competition by getting more people
> out there (not that there's problem with that) and would probably
> have a closer finish.
>
> 3. I also believe that the top 1-10 tags would be played more
often
> at official tag rounds because it would change hands more
throughout
> the week.
>
> 4. Many sedgley folks don't travel to tourneys, so quite often
there
> aren't even 7 segleyites at any given tournament. At the very
least
> we should still be able to put the tags up between the 2-6 players
> that are out there. (Refer to reason #1)
>
> What are your thoughts for or against and why?
> Would it really mess up the scoring, how?
>
> I would like to try to get this rule changed before the new season
> starts, So long as it doens't mess the tag Zsar up.
>
> Thank you, MikeM
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>