Author |
Topic: AWL 2011 Postal Matches? (Read 1758 times) |
|
megajester
Forum Moderator
Forum Guru
Istanbul, Turkey
Gender: 
Posts: 710
|
 |
AWL 2011 Postal Matches?
« on: Apr 25th, 2011, 6:03am » |
 Quote  Modify
|
What do people think about having postal matches?
Postal matches last too long to have more than one in the year. So we wouldn't be able to have an all-play-all tournament unless all teams are prepared to play 3 postal games at once.
What we could do is just have a random draw so that each team is playing one other team. There'd be no winner but we'd still perhaps recapture the "mob vs. one" excitement. Besides, if we continue this year after year then over time you would end up with a "current leader" which would be like a champion.
|
|
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
mistre
Forum Guru
Gender:
Posts: 553
|
|
Re: AWL 2011 Postal Matches?
« Reply #1 on: Apr 26th, 2011, 8:20pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I am in favor of some type of postal format. My suggestion would be to have each team face off against each other team over the course of one year. Couldn't 3 postal matches (1 every 4 months) be doable?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Isaac Grosof
Forum Guru
Longtime Arimaa Fan
Gender:
Posts: 175
|
|
Re: AWL 2011 Postal Matches?
« Reply #2 on: Apr 26th, 2011, 8:28pm » |
Quote Modify
|
We could change the time limit to a 4 month maximum, with no move bonus, to ensure we finish. I would enjoy that.
|
|
IP Logged |
Sorry about that one thing.
|
|
|
ChrisB
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2339
Gender:
Posts: 147
|
|
Re: AWL 2011 Postal Matches?
« Reply #3 on: Apr 27th, 2011, 2:05am » |
Quote Modify
|
I like the idea of postal matches too, although my preference would be to wait a few months since I'm pretty "maxed out" with the postal mixer now.
I would prefer a postal match to a collaborative live [edit] match since I often find it difficult to schedule times for a long arimaa session.
With all the discussion involved in making postal moves, I'm pretty pessimistic that we can complete a game in four months, but would be happy to be proven wrong.
|
| « Last Edit: Apr 27th, 2011, 9:23am by ChrisB » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
mistre
Forum Guru
Gender:
Posts: 553
|
|
Re: AWL 2011 Postal Matches?
« Reply #4 on: Apr 28th, 2011, 11:37am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Apr 27th, 2011, 2:05am, ChrisB wrote:| I like the idea of postal matches too, although my preference would be to wait a few months since I'm pretty "maxed out" with the postal mixer now. |
|
Agreed, this can be put off until at least July.
on Apr 27th, 2011, 2:05am, ChrisB wrote:
I would prefer a postal match to a collaborative live [edit] match since I often find it difficult to schedule times for a long arimaa session. |
|
I am in the same boat.
on Apr 27th, 2011, 2:05am, ChrisB wrote:
With all the discussion involved in making postal moves, I'm pretty pessimistic that we can complete a game in four months, but would be happy to be proven wrong. |
|
Perhaps you are right. A 4 month time frame would require moves on a average of once per day just to accommodate a 60-move match. I have another idea that I will post in a separate post.
|
| « Last Edit: Apr 28th, 2011, 11:38am by mistre » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
mistre
Forum Guru
Gender:
Posts: 553
|
|
Re: AWL 2011 Postal Matches?
« Reply #5 on: Apr 28th, 2011, 11:54am » |
Quote Modify
|
Here is another idea for AWL postal matches.
How about two-player vs two-player collaborative postal matches?
Here's how I think it might work:
Each sub team of two (from the larger AWL teams) would be paired vs another similarly rated sub team of two (the sum of the ratings).
Each 2-player team would be able to discuss moves in whatever way that choose. Then the person who actually makes the move in the game would alternate from move to move. This means that both players are given equal chances to select the final move (although I hope you would discuss with your teammate first!)
Here is why I like this idea:- It gives an opportunity for players to get to know other players and their styles in a more personalized way.
- It can be a great educational experience.
- It gives everyone equal chances to have a say.
- No need for compiling a list of moves and then voting on them which also takes longer.
- It allows for more games!
- I think it would be different and fun!
Thoughts?
|
| « Last Edit: Apr 28th, 2011, 11:57am by mistre » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
megajester
Forum Moderator
Forum Guru
Istanbul, Turkey
Gender:
Posts: 710
|
|
Re: AWL 2011 Postal Matches?
« Reply #6 on: Apr 28th, 2011, 2:32pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Apr 28th, 2011, 11:54am, mistre wrote:Here is another idea for AWL postal matches.
How about two-player vs two-player collaborative postal matches?
Here's how I think it might work:
Each sub team of two (from the larger AWL teams) would be paired vs another similarly rated sub team of two (the sum of the ratings).
Each 2-player team would be able to discuss moves in whatever way that choose. Then the person who actually makes the move in the game would alternate from move to move. This means that both players are given equal chances to select the final move (although I hope you would discuss with your teammate first!)
Here is why I like this idea:- It gives an opportunity for players to get to know other players and their styles in a more personalized way.
- It can be a great educational experience.
- It gives everyone equal chances to have a say.
- No need for compiling a list of moves and then voting on them which also takes longer.
- It allows for more games!
- I think it would be different and fun!
Thoughts? |
|
I'll tell you one thing, if we did this it would be possible to have an all-play-all tournament, because you would set up 3 games for each club, one against each of the others.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
novacat
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #751
Gender:
Posts: 119
|
|
Re: AWL 2011 Postal Matches?
« Reply #7 on: Apr 28th, 2011, 11:38pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Apr 28th, 2011, 11:54am, mistre wrote:| How about two-player vs two-player collaborative postal matches? |
|
Sounds like fun! I'd be up for it as an addition to regular AWL games, as part of the postal mixer, or even as a stand alone event.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Hippo
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #4450
Gender:
Posts: 883
|
|
Re: AWL 2011 Postal Matches?
« Reply #8 on: May 31st, 2011, 6:27am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Apr 28th, 2011, 11:54am, mistre wrote:
How about two-player vs two-player collaborative postal matches? |
|
I like this idea (especially with the prospect to learn from chessandgo)  . Oh no, I have misread it. I would not be paired with him  .
|
| « Last Edit: May 31st, 2011, 6:28am by Hippo » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: AWL 2011 Postal Matches?
« Reply #9 on: May 31st, 2011, 11:37am » |
Quote Modify
|
My experience from being part of the Mob against chessandgo was that a week worked excellently well for the time control, and that the size of the Mob was also good. The only thing that was wrong is that there was too much pressure on the One. It was so exhausting that after the second Mob game completed, neither chessandgo nor I wanted to be the One any more.
If there are two mobs playing each other, that takes care of the opponent problem, so that's a good start. Things I would worry about undermining the discussion dynamic would be too few players participating and deadlines that are fast enough that teammates skip discussion when they are a little busy. The idea was floated elsewhere to have a Mob vs. Gang game splitting all the players in the world into just two teams instead of into four; that seems more likely to get enough players on each of the two teams to have a good discussion dynamic. But maybe I am just overly pessimistic, and the community has now grown to where we could have four teams and all of them functioning well. And if it is important for some reason to have the game finish within a specified number of months, we could experiment with a shortened time control as well; we won't know how it works unless we try!
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
mistre
Forum Guru
Gender:
Posts: 553
|
|
Re: AWL 2011 Postal Matches?
« Reply #10 on: Jun 1st, 2011, 8:19am » |
Quote Modify
|
Thinking more about collaborative postal matches, I am leaning towards a Mob vs Mob approach versus my original idea.
Keying on Fritzlein's idea that there is too much pressure on the One, that might also be the case in 2 vs 2 matches, especially when one person is expected to carry the game (due to the other not being available or not contributing). I also am doubting that this will be different enough from just regular postal matches and foster enough of a sense of collaboration or camaraderie.
For those reasons, let's nix my idea and focus on either 1 Mob vs Mob match or 2 games based on the four AWL teams. If we only do one match, it makes the most sense to have Rockies-Atlantics vs Europa-Ring of Fire for both numbers and geographic reasons.
Also, timing wise, I think an August 1 start date could be something to shoot for (most of the postal mixer games should be done or almost done by then.)
|
| « Last Edit: Jun 9th, 2011, 8:06am by mistre » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Login
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print