« Marketing DOES Matter! | Main | Short But Sweet »

Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Sharon:

I rarely play in club games that are NOT sectionally rated. I look for such games because for the extra $1 they "pay" so well. I think they have a place in club games because they bring in players like me that might not otherwise play. Obviously they need to be limited, but if there were to be changes I would suggest make the changes in number, not in the points.

I think the points awarded for these big point games should be less than a sectional, because it seems to diminish the value of a sectional in my opinion.

A 25-table game at the club can net you 2.50. At a sectional it might be something like 6.00. Maybe a big point game should be halfway between, 4.25. I know club championships are worth less and there are also unit games and upgraded club championships, it's all quite confusing. Maybe there should be two levels in between, 3.67 and 4.83.

MN players do not have the opportunity to earn points like other areas where there are many more sectionals and regionals. We make up for it with the 'triple point' games. The evening crowd in particular want these games as evidenced by better attendance when extra MP's are awarded.

Where do you find the rating schedule of club & special games? What interests me are the best-attended games with hand records and multiple score comparisons. A heightened payout generates more table count. My experience as a non-life master was that Silver points were the toughest to come by. But sectional rating doesn't equate to silver points right? I'd be in favor of more STACs that raise $ for units & districts to support their initiatives and pay out in silver.

The comments to this entry are closed.