Select Committee for Format/Structure of WHBPCVII

I have an objection. How do I best communicate this? What I have to discuss is complex and long and might not work in print. I would like the opportunity to discuss it in person with Brook and other Jedi members at Slayerfest in Sydney before anything is announced.

Why was the decision made not to allocate any place(s) to the host (Timaru) as per previous years?

I would think it best to not announce the tournament structure until its finalised. On that structure I raise these points:

• I have seen comments online(LOBP) that people prefer smaller groups due to less time waiting around, shorter days etc. Maybe the second day could be groups of 12 instead of 24, meaning 5 rounds are over quicker. Alternatively could take the top 6 from each day 1 group for a top 12, and the rest battle it out in two groups of 18. This would mean three groups on day 2. Still 2 massive groups, but finishing day 2 with a group of top 12 would be pretty sweet.
• The last day we should push for the groups format. Having only a single final in a double elim day is kinda weird, should be either double elim or not. Groups format eliminates the issue altogether.

@davidcorrin Is it too long to email Dave? If not, just reply to the email I sent last week. It would be up to @samcallander on when he would like to announce it as his original intention was the start of March but NAH and EU took a while to work with.

@alanengland with 60 or more places as with Seattle and Florida there is plenty of room for this allocation. Geneva only had 48 teams as well and did not reserve a spot for the organisers either. It's a great sentiment and I'd like to have spots reserved in the Wildcard for Timaru, but realistically, as a "World Champ Finals" tournament, all teams should be there on merit.

Geneva had 48 teams with only 4 aussie/nz. This one will have 6 plus an advantage of wildcard spots and priority on unfilled spots.

@kent1 I am open to not announcing the format until AHBPA approval too as you've proposed. The most important thing at this stage is only the allocations so regions know going into their qualifiers.

NAH have already approved it and EU didn't have any complaints but no official way to rubber stamp it.

@kent1 I've spent weeks going through various breakdowns of groups and rounds to find a balance between low wait times but not having to double up. Going to groups of 12 means doubling up games.

I'm very open to the third day of small groups of 4 for a round robin then single elimination

Good to see discussions on the this. Happy to delay announcements.
@brooktaitstyles perhaps you could attempt to summarise for everyone the process you've been through to get to this, and the parties who have input.
@kent-syd I think there is merit in a sense of progression in format from day one to day two. But based on five games only is a small sample size. Hmmmm...
@davidcorrin sounds pretty complicated there bud. As we can't all be at slayer fest [was keen but couldn't bring myself to listen to same music all weekend ;-)] could you perhaps try to get it down in text? Or hey, maybe record yourself explaining it in a vid and post online.

Does anyone have any further comments/objections to the allocations?

To summarise the format:

The process was to create a format that improved on the feedback from previous world champs, create a structure that was easier to manage by organisers, improve wait times for teams, create a system that gave credit to top ranked teams but still allowed a fair process for lower ranked teams to move up on day 2 rather than the squeeze seen in the past.

The feedback I had from NAH was that whatever system we went with would be adopted as long as we can justify the change. This is why the system is different from the past, but not so much it wouldn't be adopted. I originally pushed for smaller groups and for the round robin style our tournaments have been doing recently but this would be a big push for teams to accept such a drastic change. With 48 teams its also very hard to balance waiting times and NAH's feedback was that top teams wanted to play other top teams on the first 2 days for practice before eliminations (which having smaller groups would negate).

This final system is very much the same as Sydney's AHBPC and determines a much more accurate rank than previous WHBPCs going into the final day. With 4 courts, wait times would average at playing every third round (~30 minutes gap) with hardly any back-to-back games. A rough run through of times means we could likely have 15 minute games.

I dealt mostly with John Hayes the tournament director of NAH, a little bit with Vince (of podium) and Alejandro and Clement from the EU committee.