Poll: Table Tennis Match Format

Hello everyone, here is a poll to determine which would be the best structure for points allocation if we were to adopt the 9 singles format, where each player plays 3 singles.

a)
Score     Points
9 - 0   5 - 0
8 - 1   5 - 0
7 - 2   4 - 1
6 - 3   4 - 1
5 - 4   3 - 2

b)
Score     Points
9 - 0   3 - 0
8 - 1   3 - 0
7 - 2   3 - 0
6 - 3   2 - 1
5 - 4   2 - 1

c)
Each set contested is worth 1 point.

d)
None of the above.

Comments

[Chris Ogle]

If anyone chooses option (d) above perhaps they would like to additionally leave a comment at the bottom here with their preference, just so's we get a good discussion going.

[David Edwards]

The first set of options is different to the actual queation.
The options are an assumption the rule has been passed and the poll question is an open choice for format.
The answers may be different in this case. For example, if you did not wish to change the format of matches, you would have to vote D but if you were only voting on the points for a nine single match, I would probably vote for A.

[Chris Ogle]

Hi David,

The poll is an attempt to identify the most popular scoring system should a change to the format to 9 singles be voted in... At the AGM it was suggested that 9 singles would have been approved had it not been combined with an unpopular change to the points allocation.

In this event to put a new proposal forwards for 9 singles at an EGM this would have to be accompanied by a suitable scoring system as well... here I am looking for contributions from players as to their preferences... and comments too!

[Gordon Hitchman]

Ref ; Score suggestions

I prefer d) none of the above.
I also prefer the current format as it has the advantage of
1. Early finish
2. Allows for a Doubles game.
3. Suits older and youth players
4. Is a good introduction for players new to League matches.
5. Is more social.
6. has a good balance between standards of the players concerned.
7.Allows at least one player from each team to play three singles if that is so desired.

The nine singles format (which ever way it is scored is irrelevant) is more suited to the elite players who by their very nature are highly competitive and is generally not suited for the rank and file members, which make up the bulk of the League membership, and look at it as a social event with a modicum of competition to give it an edge.

Is it right that a proposal that is voted in accordance with the constitution as not accepted at the AGM be ignored and re proposed by calling for an EGM. Why have a constitution in the first place.

Gordon Hitchman

[Chris Ogle]

Hi Gordon,

You make some valid points. One which I will answer directly is the calling of an EGM. I am not aware of the procedure as yet (but will find out shortly), however a split decision of 7-7 suggests that there is a reasonable percentage of the league members that would like to see change. Personally I was not in favour of the current format, but have had to endure it for the past few seasons anyway...

I would of course conceed that there is no reason to call an EGM if everyone is happy, but I have had discussions where individuals have expressed a disinclination to play in Watford in the future should it stay as it is.

The constitution exists to enable the league to function. An EGM must be allowable if deemed appropriate, how are we to determine that? There will always be an element of subjectiveness, however with a 7-7 on the format change and the possibility of it being carried in favour if the scoring issue had been separated out, would seem to me to be a convincing enough reason to have another vote on it... and of course all teams would be eligible to participate in deciding the eventual outcome.

[Mike McGarry]

I am a little puzzled here. The league rules allow for a 'Special General Meeting' that can be called for by the Committee or the clubs. So why an Extraordinary General Meeting called for by the chairman?
What is more puzzling is that, despite all the discussion on the website this year, nobody seems to have a clear idea as to what the majority of players want.
What maybe coming out is that there is a different view between the Premier Division and the rest.
Not that I wish to stir an already sticky can of worms but is there any reason why you have to have the same system/points scoring for all the divisions?

[karl seddon]

Hi Chris

Thought i'd keep to the blog...

Although I didnt attend the AGM ( I did attend the presentation evening btw)I am not against the idea of a 9 single format, although at the same time quite happy with what we have. (btw again... I know Im supposed to vote but prefer to just comment instead). My preference would be (b) as I still think it puts the emphasis on actually winning the match as a team rather than gaining points as individuals. 3 pts for a win would mean the perceived weakest member of the team would have to win at least one game to gain maximum points whilst the other two team members would have to win all their games - so its like a bonus point for doing so well! Options (a) and (c) have too much of a points difference in terms of winning a match and would give away to many easy points which maybe arent earned that well, when one team is obviously stronger than the other team, or if theres a walkover. I think this particular points system (b) would still keep healthy competition within the match and within the league standings, and in my view still maintain a social aspect in that every game does not count towards the final point score.

[Dave Soloway]

"What maybe coming out is that there is a different view between the Premier Division and the rest."

---

This is quite a valiad point. What was the make up of the 7 for and the 7 against in terms of division? if it was mainly voted for by premier league players then why not havea different format for that division as was suggested above

[David Edwards]

That sounds like a good idea.
A few practicalities need to be addressed like new cards and I am not sure how it would work on the website but I am sure it could be looked at.
By the way, I did not record the people who voted at the AGM Only the number of votes cast.

[karl seddon]

Sounds like a rubbish idea to me...by going down that route we are creating an elitist league, which wont be good for the game....and if this attitude is the norm then maybe thats part of the reason we find it difficult sometimes to attract new or 'ex' players to the game. Just my opinion.

[ian]

I have played in all 4 divisions and I do not remember it being less competitive in div 3 so I do not agree that its only/mostly prem players who would prefer 9 singles.

Hey Gordon, why do you say the current format is 'more social' than 9 singles? What do you mean by 'social' when applied to a TT match? Im not disagreeing..I just dont understand that statement.

It seems that a 7-7 format vote at the meeting would indicate that maybe in a referendum the vote would be very close so I think it not unreasonable to hold a SGM or a EGM in order to have a re vote and get a majority decision. Surely that is desirable.
Had I been able to attend the AGM I would have voted for the proposal but not really wanting the linked 9 point suggestion, so a revised proposal vote should be very interesting and Gordon, may not get voted in!

[Chris Ogle]

Ian raises an interesting point about the competitiveness in the lower divisions... actually on a number of ocassions I have remarked to my Premier colleagues that the lower divisions take this Table Tennis far more seriously than we do!! Especially when we hear shouting and excitement when matches are close...

Even as the winners of the Premier division this year, I and all my Team mate members play for fun. I play in Watford because I like the people I play with and the people we play against. I do play to win, but to be honest I do not give a jot whether we win the league or not... I play to exercise and keep fit and in that goal I win every week! I will not be world champion or County champion, what I like to do is play to the best of my ability and I am disappointed when I do not...

For my team mates it would be more enjoyable and more social if we all played the same... 3 singles.

[kevin williams]

It's important to remember that a lot of matches end under time pressure at Queens even with only 8 sets being played. Some matches have to be conceded without all the sets having been played which is not a good advert for our league and a real irritant to the players involved. With 3 county standard players in their team I dont suppose WWCC would ever find themselves clock watching if an extra set was added, but a lot of teams would. I fully accept that the current format is a bit odd but unless the school are willing to relax the time restrictions that they currently impose then I feel we have little option but to stick to the existing set up.

[Stuart Seaholme]

Excepting everyone wants to play the best they can why should that exclude doubles. It does require different strategies' and different skills. The player that may not be the strongest singles player can often be a good doubles player and can have a more important part in the match than perhaps had they played all singles. Interesting, perhaps, that all major international event includes doubles in their team events. Worlds, Olympics, Europeans etc yet in England we consistently ignore this aspect of the game

[Martin Johnson]

Regarding the points system, I have just done the Poll, and voted d). As requested, I am now further clarifying! Essentially, I don't really care what the points sytem is, although if pushed, I think I'd prefer it not be one point per set (even though that's what I play in Hemel), as I think that can discourage a team from playing a weaker player in their squad, which may, in turn, discourage them from playing!!

That said, teams know the points system (whatever it is) before the season starts and therefore play to it; besides, I don't think the points system actually makes much difference; there would be very few changes in positions (never mind in promotions / relegations), *whichever* of the points systems was used!!

On the subject of the match format, I agree with Stuart about keeping the doubles, and for the same reasons. However, I disagree about limiting the number of matches, as personally, after travelling all the way to matches, I would prefer to get four matches rather than three. If matches really did start *ON TIME*, and knock-up time didn't extend well past 7:30pm, and time between games and matches was kept to a minimum, I doubt there would be many matches that would hit time issues. At Jets, I daresay an extra table would be available at the end of the night, should one or two matches look like endangering the finish time!!

I actually really liked the unique system that Watford used to have!

[Geof Bax]

If we do change to a nine singles format, I think the worse points outcome is the point per game one. Any system that allows a team to win all it's matches and not win the league cannot be right. A team winning all it's matches by 5-4 would be worse off than a team winning many matches by a large score but losing quite a few by a close score. At the end of the day, the idea is to try and win all your matches and be rewarded for doing so. As Martin has said if matches started on time and had almost no intervals between matches there would not be a problem with nine singles. See you at the EGM, Cheers Geof Bax.

[ian]

We completely agree with Geof but Hey!
When is this EGM?
We are supposed to be submitting our entries but I know of two players who are awaiting the outcome of the EGM before entering into the Watford League.

[Mike McGarry]

Plenty of leagues seem to play a point a game quite happily and it does mean that every game is worth something. On the other hand, perhaps there should be a premium on winning matches. What about two points for a win plus a point a game. This would also work in the current format with two points for a win, one for a draw plus a point a game.
And, what about six singles and three doubles for nine games? Everyone plays the same number of singles and you get to play doubles with all your team mates. The minus points are that you miss playing one of your opponents at singles and, if you turn up a player short then you concede four games. But it is an enjoyable format.