Tournament Ideas


I had a thought for a very different format that could be used for a tournament.

The general idea being that you have a threshold you need to reach before you can win the tournament. Once you reach this threshold you would need to accomplish a set condition to win the tournament. My initial idea is to give out points each game based on highest game. Then once you meet the threshold to win the tournament you must have the high game one game to win the tournament.

An example of how this would work.

16 man field.
High game each game is awarded 15 points, second highest game 14 and so on and so forth.
Threshold would be 44 (number of points for 1st times 3 less one guaranteeing a minimum of 4 games).
Winner must first reach the threshold and then once that condition is met they then must have the highest game in one game. (Any high games prior to meeting this threshold do not count towards this condition)
All other seeding would be based on points earned through games played.

What’s everyone’s opinion, or your own take on different tournament formats?

I find this interesting, it definitely makes for an even playing field essentially, as anyone could go on a heater.

1 Like

How well do I understand this? Each person competes in two stages:

  1. Race to 44 points, and then
  2. Race to win the high-game pot

That interests me a lot. I could imagine many interesting variations. Neat!

1 Like

That is correct JB. I think it’s a fun change and is both easily scalable to different field sizes, as well malleable with how you set out those two stages. I worked out an idea with just raw scoring thresholds (ie running total for stage one then a one game score in stage two to win). I also think something that would make this event exciting from a viewers perspective is that there is no way to just build enough of a lead that the last game doesn’t matter. With this format you actively need to accomplish something to win and every game has big implications. Also nice to know that at no point you further than four games from winning the tournament.

1 Like

I would say the concern with it being purely scoring based system, would be there is no guarantee how many games it would take for the second condition to be met. Which from an operations proprietor side of things would be hard to make a schedule and plan around which is why I generally look at it based on the ranking side of it.

Now I want to try this format with the kids. Maybe it’s a race to 100 pins over average, then the first to bowl the high game over average wins.

Ironically part of this idea I had, was that it’s great for youth to learn how to compete with a goal in mind.
POA works well meet the 100 POA and then have to have single game like 30-40 over would work well I think. Out of curiousity how would you handle a situation where someone first reaches the 100 mark but then happens to fall below it after the fact?

I had in mind a race to +100 after any game, then you progress to being able to win with the highest POA score the next game. In principle, you could win in two games. If that happens, then everyone else keeps going to battle for second place and so on.

If nobody wins after 7 games, then everyone who made it to +100 bowls one last game, high POA takes it.

I think it could work quite well!

1 Like

That’s a good idea, I hadn’t consider the idea of a one game shoot out after a specified number of games. That nicely resolves the issue of the infinite win condition, while maintaining the integrity of the format. You will have to let me know if you ever run a version of this and what the feedback you receive is for it!

1 Like