Top 3 or Top 4?

Discussion in 'CricSim Cricket' started by Cribbage, Sep 26, 2015.

  1. Speirz DG Speirs

    I've got no problem with a top 3. Can't really think of any good reason to change it tbh.
  2. Jager LO Townsend

    I personally prefer the suggested top 4 system in the OP.
  3. Rocks DN Boland

    Happy with the current set up.
  4. Youngman JE Harding

    I think its pretty good as it is.
  5. SuperNova SJ Nova

    Top 3 for 9 teams
    Top 4 for 10 teams
  6. Cribbage RG Cribb

    Yes this has always been my thought and I think I'll stick to it. Was basically just wondering if the guys who played for lower-ranked teams were worried about too many dead rubbers at the end of the season, or found that annoying in general.
  7. Raide KN Rask

    What happens if say first and second had the same amount of points, and first was only decided by quotient? Does the 1st place team really deserve a free ride to the final over the second team? Was the difference of the "best" and second place really so much that one gets a free finals ticket, and the other plays an extra game.

    At least if you have a 1st v 2nd match in that situation, both teams (who imo are equally deserving) get a crack at that jump to the final.
  8. Hurricane JD Hurricane

    Coming from a low ranked team I would prefer a top four as it keeps lower ranked teams in the running for longer. Plus it would be a cinderella story for the 4th placed team to win their way through to the final and win it all.

    I am ambivalent between PEWS's OP structure for the knockouts vs the one posted two posts below it.
  9. Eggman DA Eggman

    If the first place team had a better year by quotient, yeah they should have a free ticket. If you look at this season, Pumas were clearly the best team all year but if there was a 1vs2 game they would've lost because they overcome the Vipers :ninja:
  10. HeathDavisSpeed HT Davis

    Have a wooden spoon play off to keep the tail end charlies interested until then.

    To be honest, this isn't like professional sport where the lack of motivation of teams already out of the running can suffer and impact on important results at the top of the table. Really, top 3 should be enough even with 10 teams.
  11. Speirz DG Speirs

    I think most people were just happy to see simming regardless of where they were on the ladder.
  12. Hurricane JD Hurricane

    In the NHL of the 1990s there were 24 teams and 16 would make the playoffs. The playoffs were the best. "It's where the real season begins" is what each announcer would say during the first round.

    I have lost touch with how many teams there are now - 30 odd? 16 still make it through.
  13. Hurricane JD Hurricane

    [h=3]Metathesiophobia :ninja: :ninja:[/h]
  14. Escath LE Schaw

    Top 3 is more fair to teams that achieved more to get there.
    Top 4 will probably lead to better storylines when it comes to qualification time.
  15. Athlai JJD Heads

    Top 4 with a losers bracket like Raide said.
  16. GIMH GIMH Martyn

    Finals systems to decide champions are an abomination but if you must have them then make it as few teams as possible
  17. Howe JHF Howe

    You must hate the world cup
  18. Old Mate M Perry

    The way Raide had the top four is best but if you want first place to go straight through to the final keep it as top 3, extra bye is shithouse.
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2015
  19. KickATinAlong IA Ryabovol

    Top 3 whilst there are still only 9 teams. Though when a 10th team is introduced, Raides format is much better, the extra bye is yech.
  20. Notsure SM Green

    We will have 6 club competitions next season with provincial stuff on top of it. There should be something for everyone towards the end of the season. Last season at the Cyclones we got stuck into the Horrigan Plate after we got knocked out of every other competition.

Share This Page