Checkers USA

Pecan · Joined: 23 Jul 2004 Posts: 53

http://checkersusa.com/checkers/pool/tournaments/regions/region.htm

filippov · Joined: 05 Oct 2004 Posts: 49

Mr Pecan, I think that is a marvelous idea. I hope it will not only be an idea but a reality.

I also enjoy reading your most interesting articles. Keep up the good work, now that we have read your good words, your expectations are great.

B. Joey Bumpous

Shotgun · Posted: Sun Nov 07, 2004 12:32 pm Post subject: Regional Tournaments

I think this is a great idea. But, wouldn't one need to have a list of active local clubs and its membership before considering which cities to place in a regional? My two cents worth!!!! Also, this concept could develop with few barriers that could not be overcome if we can find means by which to involve the APCA and its board members which include club presidents and etc. The APCA should have records as to active clubs and its membership.
This concept should not die!!!! It should be taken to the July 2005 tournament and discussed with the different club presidents when the APCA have its Board Meeting as well as it opening meeting for the players.

charter · Site Admin Joined: 30 Oct 2004 Posts: 77

How about them registering their clubs on our site (as BB users)? They can update their information to be current. We can go further and keep a database of clubs and members - but I really do not like exposing private information like players addresses, phones, etc. I think the city/club is quite enough.

Pecan · Joined: 23 Jul 2004 Posts: 53

My response to the three Replys that was received as of 11/8/04. They are (a) Filippov; (b) Shotgun (c) Charter.

(a) Thanks for the endorsement filippov. Do, spread the word in your area.

(b) Thanks for the plug Shotgun. With reference to ACTIVE clubs? For us, all clubs and individuals are ACTIVE. The list that I offered was just that-a list; it was the cities that was copied from a particular Yearbook. But notice, I used the term, 'The Family of Pool Checkers Players.' That means, it doesn't matter whether you are in a club, or if you are an individual playing on your own-or whether you are ACTIVE or not, we would want you to be a part of our effort.

Our list could easily change if we receive information from a particular entity suggesting that we do so. There could be additions, deletions. enhancements, and/or rearrangements whereever is necessary.

(c) Thanks for the comments Charter. You are right; the BB could be used to communicate whatever information is appropriate.

filippov · Joined: 05 Oct 2004 Posts: 49

I would like it to be known that I favor the idea and have high hopes for the success of a "Regional Tournament" as Mr Thompson has outlined it.
I can only say I hope the idea of a Regional Tournament will make it easier and less costly for some who could not participate because of economical hardship. Hopefully with this idea fully blossomed it will help promote and encourage checker players all over the United States.

Just as this "Site, Checkers USA", has grown from an idea to a beautiful and marvelous work of art. It is almost a Master Piece. But it took a lot of hard work and hope. Some may not share my enthusiasm, but you must admit this is a lot of growth in one year. And so is the idea of a Regional Tournament a zealous idea and has the same potential of success. But it also takes a lot of hard work, a lot of cooperation and brotherly love.

Sometimes I act a little Boldly and take the liberty to do or say certain things, on second thought I will not take the liberty. But I respectfully ask of you Mr. Thompson what do you think about Asking our readers to put in writing what they think about a Regional Tournament and would they be in favor of supporting it or not? Do they think it to be a good idea? Maybe Jake will allow a poll, and they will not have to identify themselves.

B. Joey Bumpous

charter · Site Admin Joined: 30 Oct 2004 Posts: 77

Pecan · Joined: 23 Jul 2004 Posts: 53

In response to replies posted 11/8/04; (a) Filippov and (b) Charter

(a) The positive comments will go a long way in helping the cause. Thanks for your input. But, with respect to polling the players to see who is in favor of the idea, I don't want to do that at this time. No one wants to be put on the spot.

I have always been of a mindset, if one thinks he has a good idea, go ahead and try to implement it. "The proof will be in the pudding." Also, I have found that, in life, often times, many are slow to come aboard when new ideas are offered.

The coming months and years will be the determiner. It will not be what was said or done in the short term, but what is said and done over the long haul that will determine the success or failure of the idea.

I did communicate with Dr. Smith through Instant Message, and he acknowledged the idea and said that he thought it was good. So, things are looking up. Thanks again.

(B) I know you are curious about my slow in communicating Jake, but I am still having periodic problems with Submitting messages on the BB. On occasions, I can send them without problems. Yet, on other occasions, I receive an error message, Invalid_Session. I have contacted my provider; they are supposed to be working on it. At any rate, we will stay in touch.

MikeA · Joined: 01 Dec 2004 Posts: 1

Congratulations to “Pecan” Thompson for articulating a serious omission in our checker playing community, and for providing a viable approach for solving the problem. I would like to endorse this initiative further by adding a few comments which I feel could enhance the proposal.
Here are my suggestions.

REGIONS
 Add another region – Caribbean I (Bahamas, Miami, FL,etc.)
 Encourage clubs to form regional chapters and to seek sponsorship by using the increased visibility gained thru’ the success of these tournaments
 Encourage inter-regional team tournaments with representative teams (Regional All Stars) for each region at each level. Thus, players who participate successfully in their regional tournaments can be rewarded for their diligence.
 Encourage match play whenever convenient at some of these tournaments.

UNIFORMITY & STANDARDIZATION

 Create a consultative/advisory group to whom club officials and organizers can refer to or call for assistance if and when help is needed to organize tournaments.
 Develop a standard format for displaying the tournament results. [This format can be developed in Excel (so that numbers add-up automatically and accurately) or some other standard software, and copies of the program on disk can be handed out to all club officials and organizers.].
 Develop a standard format to announce tournaments for uniformity across the regions. This announcement should specify clearly the intended program.
[Here is an example - my opinion and bias - of how the arrangements can be set-up. Some liberty is being exercised here.]

Tournament: New York Open, 2005
[Trophies will be dedicated to the memory of James “Step” Searles –Past President of the Brooklyn Elite Pool Checker Club ]
Date: Friday: May 28 to Sunday: May 30
[All local players should be registered by Friday; Walk-ins accepted on Saturday only. However, an extra charge (25% of entrance fee) will be applied, except for visitors, “out-of-towners”, and foreign players.]

Duration of Tournament: Competitive play
• starts at 9.00 a.m. Saturday, May 29.
• ends at 3.00 p.m. Sunday, May 30.
[It is possible to have early start on the day of registration-Friday, May 28, but only by arrangement between 5.00 p.m. & 9.00 p.m. Organizers and tournament officers must be notified before hand of any such early starters].

Venue: Borough of Manhattan Community College,
New York, NY 10007

Type of Tournament: Round Robin (Each player will play
every other player in the same class or division)

Competitive Levels: An individual tournament for Level I, Level II, Level III players [i.e., Three (3) competitions will be held for players of the following classes:

Level I:
The Elite class for players at the APCA playing level of Top Masters & possibly upper Masters.

Level II:
The Pro class for players at the APCA playing level of possibly lower Masters, & upper Junior Masters.

Level III:
The Expert class for players at the APCA playing level of possibly lower Junior Masters, & upper Gold Bar.

A fourth level –Level IV [the Shark class for players at the APCA playing level of Gold Bar & Blue Ribbon can be arranged if there is a large enough demand ].

Entrance Fee: Level I $25 per player
Level II $20 per player
Level III $15 per player

Prizes: 1st Place Trophy + $Cash
2nd Place Trophy + $Cash
3rd Place Trophy + $Cash

GENERAL COMMENTS
 Send letter of proposal to club presidents as not all of them (or the players) might have e-mail access.
 Encourage clubs to post the proposal on notice boards
 Assign levels (please see the example under “Competitive Levels” above) to the competition being played with new names for the class of players and, of course, their APCA equivalents.
 Develop for the players a rating system that will withstand international scrutiny.
 Find an effective (e.g., significant reduction in ratings) way to penalize players who do not complete their matches.
 Introduce Swiss System of play (or some alternative system) for large groups of players when Round-Robin becomes inconvenient.
 Develop a newsletter (electronic and paper, as well) that tracks the regional schedules, the official announcements and results of the tournaments

Also there is a much larger (hidden checker community) that will not be aware of this new initiative. In addition, there are immigrant players (good players – remember Momodou Faal) who have no idea of the checker community.

I know that many of us are rearing to go, as we are just glad to have something started and on-going. However, there is the danger in starting off with weak standards that become difficult to correct or change
when problems begin to manifest themselves. So, please bear with me as regards some of the detail above.
I am also willing to provide administrative support to get this proposal implemented.
“Pecan”, congratulations again.
MikeA.

Pecan · Joined: 23 Jul 2004 Posts: 53

My response to MikeA’s Proposal

First, let me think you Mike for a well-written, in-depth, and some very ambitious proposals. Many of your suggestions can be incorporated immediately. For example, the inclusion of a Caribbean Region can be implemented now. Why not include the two clubs offered, The Bahamas, and Miami into the Western Region with Los Angeles and Houston. We could just call it the ‘Caribbean Connection’ of the Western Region. Until such times as these cities tell us exactly how they want to be categorized, we could then make that declaration.

We know that the distances between the four cities are prohibitive, but it’s only on paper. The details can be worked out later. Unquestionable, we will need spokespersons from those cities to address the issue. I would never be so bold as to try to speak for them.

With reference to the Regional Tournaments and their detailed format, that could be left up to the individual hosting club/city. For example, if Brooklyn was hosting it for the year of 2005 and wanted to call it the “Step Searles” Open. That would be just fine. Of course, we would call it a Regional. Perhaps, the next year, maybe Baltimore would want host it, they would be free to call it whatever they wanted to. Bottom line is, for now, until we get it more coordinated, there can be great latitude in how and what each city/club would do it. Over time, as we see what is working and what is not, we could make adjustments.

With reference to you serving in the capacity you suggested, we know that would be a great positive. And we would be delighted to work with you. One of the most important things that we have neglected to mention is, how the tournaments would be funded. We can discuss that at a later time also.

Observe our flyer which will soon be posted on the BB. For now, that’s how we would want to start out. We are always cognizant that there can and will be adjustments as we proceed. The flyer also addresses how we intend to address the division issue-for now.

I also noted details about signing in at a certain time or there would be some kind of penalty. At this point, I think, that might be a ‘turn off.’ to many potential participants. So I am probably thinking of more liberal rules, initially. As we grow, if we grow, perhaps we could try to implement more stringent rules to make the tournaments have a more professional look.

While we don’t expect all of your proposals to be implemented, many of them can and will be. But for now, let us in each Region, pick a time (one of the two month dates), sign in and began preparing for the year 2005. I have just received permission from Mr. Roger
Blaine to include his Fair-Play Tournament in South Bend, Indiana in the Regionals for September 2005. That process has already begun. When the calendar that’s posted is full, we in the Pool Checkers community will have at least six tournaments that we can choose to attend during the year. I am fairly assured of attending at least three and possibly more if things go as planned.

Finally, we will always keep all suggestions and proposals on the table. Perhaps, in time, it will become abundantly clear that some that were put on hold should have to be employed and some that were adopted will be flawed. For now. let’s take what we have and “Let’s Roll.” Thanks again for your commitment.

PS. I will be responding to more of your work as I study it. CT
_________________
Charles Thompson