1) Length of Season- Going from a 15 game season to a 25 game season should help immensely with all the tiebreaker issues we had this season. Here is what I'm thinking:

3 games vs each division rival (9). Plus 1 game vs all other teams in the conference (12). Plus (4) games vs the other conference that would be determined based on previous years finish (much like the NFL gauges strenth of schedule).


2) Playoff Format- A lot of you expressed concern over having to give the top seed a full game advantage in a best of five series. On one hand, I wanted to make sure that the regular season games were all very important, but on the other hand agree that a 1 game lead is a lot.

So, I'm flirting with two possible changes. Either:

A) Make the series best 4 out of 7 with a one game lead, or
Keep it best 3 out of 5, but start the higher seed with 1600 in games 1, 3, and 5 while the lower seed starts with 1400. In games 2 and 4, the lower seed would start with 1600.
It would be easy to do that. The road team would be forced to raise the first hand to 100, the other player would re-raise, and then the first player would then fold, essentially starting the match at 1600-1400.



3) Defaults- I don't want to have to kick ANY of the teams out from season one. This league will grow stronger and stronger if we can keep all of the teams in tact. So, on that note, here is what I propose:

For all teams that had defaults in season 1, they will have a chance to participate in season 2 if they deposit an extra $100 for each default into the league prize pool. If they have no defaults in season 2, they will get a FULL refund for their deposit. If they have any defaults in season 2, that money will go to a prize pool for non-playoff teams with perfect attendance.

If a team defaults for two consecutive seasons, they will be kicked out of the league with no exceptions.

4) Start Times- They should start later on Sundays. I'm thinking 7:00pm EST for ALL games with no Monday night game.

I'd rather have it be best out of 7 with a 1 game lead so that the 25 game season actually means something. I dont think the chip lead is a big enough edge for all the work put into one season.

Also, if I have AA and I'm supposed to dump 100 chips I'm not doing it. And you guys can't make me.

Yeah, I really don't think the 1600-1400 lead is much of an advantage at all. I'm for best of 7, 1 game lead to higher seed, but each series might have to be spread over 2 weeks.

i think one week to get it done would be enough. you played 4 matches and it took 20 minutes. pickl and stags played 3 and it took 2 hours.

if you set it up for 2 matches 3 nights in one week, or 3 matches in 2 nights, i think it would be fine.

25 games seems a bit extreme.

Why not just make it a 21 game season and screw the cross conference games altogether? I don't really feel that playing the Hearts Conference teams only 4 times really adds anything and it totally screws the teams that play the tougher matches.

Also, instead of a $1000 first prize maybe have $500 for best team in each conference.

I don't care how the playoffs work but when I start a match I don't want to have to do any chip dumping. Makes me feel dirty somehow. If you wanna have some sort of chip lead vs. game lead then have the programmers do it...they're smart people aren't they?

I'm not sure what the answer is to this or if there even is an answer, but one of the reasons I joined was to be able to say I played heads up against Daniel Negreanu. Despite the fact that I enjoyed playing in the league, I will always be disappointed by the fact that I didn't get that opportunity. I don't feel like I wasted my money by any stretch of the imagination, but I definitely don't feel like I got the same value for my 500 that those who played DN did. I know I'm not offering anything constructive here in terms of a solution, but I'm sure I'm not the only member of my conference that feels this way.

Of all of your changes, this is the one I like the least. 4 PM EST is tough enough if I want to play any of the big Sundays. 7 PM EST is brutal for most online players because it falls right in the middle of the big tourneys (Party Million, Stars Million, FT 200k, etc). Also, for any east coasters, 7 PM EST pretty much demolishes their night-I try to go out most Sunday nights that I bust quickly in the Stars and/or Party Million, and I could never do that if I had a 7 PM match.

Just my thoughts. Oh, and I support a 1 game lead in a best of 7 series.

I agree with this. If anything I wish the games started earlier. I have to waste most of my sunday morning waiting until the game starts (I'm CST so I was playing at noon), and then most of the day is already gone. I'd much rather have it start early so that it doesn't feel like a waste of half a weekend day.

Actually...I think I mentioned the EXACT same thing before. I was looking forward to playing Daniel too. But what am I gonna do?

Unless we do a full round robin it just won't happen.

But you make a valid point Naismith...since we don't get the same value shouldn't the Spades conference teams get a discount?

How about just scheduling the games for the weekend and letting the teams set the day and time (Sat or Sun) with a Wednesday deadline of posting when they'll play?

I kind of like that there are default days and times - makes the planning easier. Plus I enjoy being able to watch a bunch of the other games, which would be a lot harder if everyone was playing at different times.

You're exactly on the same wave-length as me today dude.

It doesn't matter the scheduled time...everyone just changes it anyhow.

I tried to watch Zim and Checky play on Sunday AND Monday for scouting and those two bums kept changing the matches.

Time changing is not good for the fans but I suppose it's a reality of the league.

I don't really care for the inter-conference play personally. With so few games, your draw of teams in interconference play can make a huge impact.

I like Fleung's schedule of 3 games against Division rivals, one game against all other teams in your conference for a 21 game schedule.

Head to head tiebreakers would run much easier because everyone plays everyone else. Division tiebreakers would run much better because each team in division will win the season series rather than having most season series be tied 1-1.

All division tiebreakers should be able to be settled by Head to head, and all tiebreakers for seeding should be record against the 8 teams not in the divisions of the 2 teams that are tied.

I should mention-the NFL does not schedule cross conference games based on strength of schedule. The NFL schedules cross conference games by pairing up divisions, and every team in one division plays every team in another division in the other conference, and then they rotate through in 4 year cycles.

The NFL does schedule interconference games based on divisional finish the previous year.

i like most of DNs ideas

i think 1 game in best of 7 is best for playoffs.

start times i don't think is an issue because Darrell has allowed us to change our times around anyways and everybody ive encountered has been willing to help if time is a problem.

I'm all for making schedule longer, but I think maybe we should play twice a week if we do. Maybe Sunday and a weekday or two games each Sunday. I like the setup now where we could have three champions each year. Also, would become a real drag to play ten more weeks if you start out 5-10.

michael

i think this would work well too, make it more like MLB should do their schedule. making all the tiebreakers the same for everyone seems like a good idea too.

i disagree with making it a varying time period to play matches. As im sure sleuthis will say, if you say "play by wednesday" it becomes very difficult to pin who a forfeit is on, and it becomes lots of finger pointing and playing the blame game, which no one wins. scheduled times are a must. i think 4 pm EST would work well, maybe 3pm/noon for west coast.

3 PM EST is 1000 times better than 4 PM EST which is 10000000000000000000 times better than 7 PM EST.

Im just happy I may get to stay in the league, even if I have to lay down a $200 deposit.

Set all of the games to be played at 3pm EST on Sunday. Players will have all week to discuss what would be better for them. People will know the schedule WAY ahead of time, so you should be able to figure something out to play the match.

The regular season has to mean something significant - I still like the 1-0 lead but make it best of seven. Five games gives too much of an edge to the home team.

I hate the 7:00 EST start time on Sundays - that conflicts with all the major Sunday tourneys on all the sites. Saturday would actually be better from my viewpoint.

I am all for the changes DN suggested, the $100 deposit should be a good idea, makes forfeits a bigger deal.

As far as getting a chance to play DN, be careful what you wish for, you may get it. He's still got game even with the golf, dog, TV apperances, release of computer game, food eating contest etc.


And we need to give Sluethis a raise.

Hooray for FCPHUPL!

QFT

I've said it before but 1-0 lead in best of 7 is much preferable to a chip advantage or best of 5 series. I think there should be 3 scheduled games on Saturday, and 3 on Sunday(if necessary).
This is simply my opinion I'm throwing out there but I like starting with 2000 chips, and having 10 or 12-minute blinds, instead of 15 minutes. I realize in private games you have to have 1500 chips, but when people play normal HU on a pokerroom skin you start with 2k chips with 10 minute blinds. But that is only for $50 and up so nevermind.
Also, I think a 25 game season or even 30 game season is a good idea, but I think we should have 2 games per week because a 25 week season can really dragggg out.

Also 4:00 eastern start time for everyone, 1:00 west coast time seems good.

Ok, no sweat. I just figured the 10:00am starts for west coasters are too early. How about 4pm EST for all games?

4PM start time sounds good, rescheduling is available if both opponents agree.

Also, I think we should try to play 2 games per week. Like mcpickl said, if you start out 5-10 or something like that, imagine how tough it'd be to play out the remaining 10 weeks.

I'd actually like to go with Saturdays also frankly, I think it's a better day. Also, we could even play three games on Saturdays and make the season have more games. A 15 week season with 3 games a week is 45 games.... just a thought.

Like this idea too. Times can/should always be negotiated and adjusted when/if scheduling issues arise.

Everything else Daniel suggested sounds great.

so for my vote, I have no problem either way.


peace!

yeh I like this idea, the more games the better. The only person this may hurt is sleuthis, but I bet he can deal or get some help with the league.

Saturdays are wayyy to tough for me, unless the matches start after 7PM EST.

I like all the suggestions made by Daniel. EXCEPT the 1600 to 1400 advantage...that advantage means nothing.

How about those who cannot play Saturdays have all their games scheduled for Sundays, and they notify the league of this before the season.

If it goes to a 25 game season then 2 games a week will keep the interest up.

Also a 1 game lead for playoffs is better than the chip lead idea.

I prefer Sundays to Saturdays. It is more of a lazy day for those of us who work. How about playing half the games on Saturday and half on Sunday? I like the 4PM EST start. People will reschedule anyway.

Agreed. There's too much going on with Saturdays. For the players who grind for a living these are the best nights to make money.

I dunno...perhaps it's just me but I don't think there's that many things wrong with the league. The feedback has been good so why not make minor adjustments instead of an overhaul?

I agree with the changes except the 1600-1400 advantage and changing to Saturday. For one I work on Saturday, but I think Sunday's are better days in general. I also think just having a start time at 3 or 4pm and then the teams can change if needed is a good idea. We need to have a start time or some teams wouldn't be able to find a time to play.

Another question, when would the next season start? Would it be a year after this one started or are we playing more than one season per year?

yes yes yes, ive been complaing about the 10AM games all season, theyre brutal...i love the idea of having all the games at 4pm eastern.

i also support the 25 game season instead of the 15 game season...the teams will spread more.

i also think the 7 game series with a 1-0 lead is perfect, 1-0 lead in a 5 game series is too much to overcome...

1. I like that idea too
2. 25 games would be great. I even like Daniel's suggestion of a 45 game season - still, if my matches today were any indication, that could be a long day of HU.
3. Yes, 1-0 lead in a 5 game series IS tough. I'm still reeling!

Having to play an early match while I was in Vegas for WSOP, I can say yes 10:00am PST is brutal. 4:00 est gives everyone a chance to sleep in like the bums we are.

I work on Saturday!!!!!!!!


I like the longer season, but 25 games seems a bit much.

I like the idea of the later Sunday matches. I lost every early match I played because I suck and also, I had just woken up.

The playoffs 1 game advantage makes perfect sense.

If we were going to do 2 games each Sunday, 3 PM would be vastly better to 4 PM. Like I said, all of the big Sundays are at 4:30, 4:30, 6, etc etc.

With all the changes and rescheduling of start times during the season, I was thinking the following.

It seems that teams were able to get together and arrange times to meet and play with very few problems

I was thinking that perhaps the schedule could be simpler:

ie - Week 1 - Looshle vs Zimmer.........

(each weeks games will be played between Friday and Monday). Teams will agree on a time to be played and will post in pregame forum by Fridays at noon EST.

This should cut down on defaults immensely and should make everything more flexible for everyone.

The main reason to have set times is so other teams can rail their opponents and keep the league more interesting. So, as long as everyone knows in advance when teams are playing they can rail when they want.


Any thoughts on this?

i have no problems with it, as long as you think that everyone will make good. just make sure you outline a policy of when the match is if no one posts in the forum by friday, and how you go about handing out defaults when they happen.

I couldn't agree more. This is the way to go. I had to reschedule multiple times this season and everyone seemed very accomodating. It's extremely easy to get a hold of people via PM.

speaking of this, when do you want your season to end?

I like it but the only thing I can think of would be with the pm's. What if I PM the team captain about playing and he isn't the one playing it, or is on vacation and doesn't get it or something. I think we should keep a start time with the knowledge that this is an option. But either way it's no big deal.

I already know what will happen. Basically if no time is posted by friday at noon, then I will ASSIGN a time for the match. (non negotiable)

In addition several times this season, there have been threads addressed to "whomever" is playing for a team this week - and have been replied to.

alrighty, as long as there's something in place, which i knew there would be.

the only reason i like it the way it is now is because if neither team agrees on a time, then the set time is still there and someone from each team has to show up. everyone was more than accomdating in rescheduling games this year, so as long as that continues i dont think it matters one way or another.

I like the flexible scheduling, it would make it much easier especially if we're playing multiple games in a weekend.

Everything seems to indicate that all the teams that participated in this season are invited back to the next season, correct.

Are there plans for expansion at all, which was discussed previously? If so, that'll also effect scheduling and number of games.

ok - here's an idea I like - actually have always liked. I must however, preface this by saying I dont think Daniel is in favour of it.

I like the idea of each team having the same number of members (either 3 or 5) with each member playing a game each week. The home team gets to choose which member on the opposing team their team members will face.

I like this idea for a few reasons - namely it adds to the "team" concept of this league. It also allows for any team member who contributed finacially to his team to ensure he gets to play, and would add to the total number of games during the season.

One difference in this would be that team members would have to be set preseason (however a list of alternates could be accepted in the event a team member is unavailable for a match).

Just throwing this idea out there............