Bar league, points are given for results, top 5 during weeks 1-15 and top 5 during 16-30 face each other where prizes are given out ranging from $30-300.

Now, let's say someone makes the top 5 twice, we'll need another person to make it 10 people.

Should the new tenth person....

A)Be drawn out of a hat of people who showed up 15+ weeks?
B)The highest point getter that wasn't in a top 5?

Someon shows up for 15, someone shows up for 30.... and you want to draw and give it to 15 weeker?

Top points- they don't draw from the Miss America losers when the winner gets busted for something.

I would take the 6th place finisher from weeks 16-30 to complete the 10.

I would give anybody who double qualifies, a double starting stack. Theyve put in the time and effort. They deserve it.

What if #6 from 1-15 did better?

That actually is in the rules, it's just they want 10 at the FT as well

Next highest points from weeks 1-30...

Are these games with buyins, or just bar prizes? Do the buyins affect the league pool? If so, I kind of like the idea of giving it to the person who played the most games throughout the entire league. If there are two... HU4ROLLZ or flip for it or whatever.

This might help with attendance, since people will know if someone does really well in both halves, the most-frequent player will win a seat by default. Maybe give 'em half a stack or something, tho'. For those that complain, you can point out that they knew that top 5 got a seat, so nothing changed in that result, and you can point out that without this rule in place, you might not have gotten as many people every week, and therefore not as big of a final prize.

Unless this is a free league and it's already over, in which case... have the two 6th place finishers go heads-up in a runoff. If that's the same person, it should be easy to determine a winner, but they might collude...

(Thanks for the return of the dancing stereoscopic head!)

X2

My whole view on it that even though it's a free league I think that the seasonal championship should be 100% based on results. The top 10 point getters player for the title has a better ring then the top 9+that one guy who shows up half of the time or more and finishes in the bottom half every time.

If they won't change it to best 6th I'll lobby for a higher attendance to qualify. ty

You're welcome. The Duke Nukem playing poker looked bad that small.

stereo? I stared at it for 45 minutes with my eyes crossed and can't get it to work. How close to the screen do you have to be?


I like an attendance-based seat. adds a little random fun! If you want to get fancy, your name goes in the hat once for every tournament you played. play all 30, get 30 lottery tickets. Play once, you still have a chance.

Good adaptation.

Have a mass tournament for anyone who played during that time. Your starting stack size is based on your number of points. If you have 100 points you start with 100 chips (blinds at 1/2 to start of course). If you showed up for one week and got one point you're effectively the chip and a chair. Whoever wins goes to the final table. You could even make it a turbo.

I'd vote most points by 6th place finisher, with tiebreakers being:

Most total points over season
Most wins (total)
Fewest tournaments
Game of random chance

Ramdom draws are gay. If you are going to do that, you should have instituted it in the first place. Have an 11 person final instead of a 10. The top 5 from each session plus a random draw "wild card." Fun times until the wild card catches rockets twice in heads up play and ships it.

I say if someone wins during the first session their results don't count for the second one. Top 5 of session 1 is binding and if someone makes top 5 in session 2, their results don't count and the next available player takes their spot.

I can't argue against letting the person with the most total points in though.

Actually, I think you should just add up all the players' points from both seasons and the highest-ranked player who wasn't in the top 5 in either season gets the 10th spot. That way the most consistent player from both seasons combined get in.

Ok, the evaluation happens at week 31, so it's pretty simple.

You have two lists that look like this:

Abe: 2500
Bob: 2400
Cal: 2100
Dan: 2000
Hal: 1500
Ina: 1000
Jen: 500

and

Ken: 2600
Abe: 2400
Len: 2200
Bob: 1900
Nat: 1500
Peg: 1200
Sam: 900


Combine the list of week 1-15 scores and the list of week 16-30 scores.

Ken: 2600
Abe: 2500
Abe: 2400
Bob: 2400
Len: 2200
Cal: 2100
Dan: 2000
Bob: 1900
Hal: 1500
Nat: 1500
Peg: 1200
Ina: 1000
Sam: 900
Jen: 500

Fill your two finalists by crossing off unique names in order of finish.

Ken to the 2nd list.
Abe to the 1st list, note his bonus chips, cross off his name.
Bob to the 1st list, note his bonus chips, cross off his name.
Len to the 2nd list.
Cal to the 1st list.
Dan to the 1st list.
Hal to the 1st list. -- 1st list complete, cross off all red names.
Nat to the 2nd list.
Peg to the 2nd list.
Sam to the 2nd list.

Well, you made that a lot more confusing.

EDIT: And Ina gets screwed in your system, even though they had a better finish in their half and more points in their half.

While I think it looks more confusing, it's pretty simple.

Insert the scores into Excel with a column for season-1 or season-2, click SORT, write down 10 names, be done.

As to Ina -- She would have been screwed, sure, but she didn't finish in the top-5 either half of the season, so I'm not sure how she's screwed out of anything. Yes, Sam gets in with fewer points, but he's still top-5 non-duplicated winners of his half of the season.

You can design all sorts of other systems to put in non-duplicated players, there's PLENTY of ways to do it, but most of the systems proposed already give weight to first-half over second-half. My suggestion doesn't do any evaluations of who is in the final tournament until the entire season is over.

If the OP takes the top 5 from the first half and then takes the top-5 from the second half, he's making 1st-half and 2nd-half have different weights. At least mine is neutral. You'd get different people in the tournament if you did it the other way around.

In that sort of method, the guy who was 6th in the first-half can never play, no matter how many points he has. In my method, the halves of the season have equal weight. [And if you switch my halves of the season around, Ina is still out -- neither half-season has an advantage.]

I think if you have one duplicate, the highest 6th place finisher from either league should get the seat. Two duplicates, then both 6th place finishers. Easy, done.

I'm not sure what you mean by "you'd get different players". I can't see a scenario where you take top 5 from each, and then use top finishers, where one half is weighed more heavily.

It may be the case where one half sends six players vs four, but if the sixth place guy did better, then its cool...

There's no scenario in my system which would have 6/4.

The simpler way to say what I'm doing is:

Take all the names, color them red (1st half) and blue (2nd half) and sort them.

Take the #1 guy, put him in whatever color list he's on, cross off anywhere that his name appears, noting bonus chips.

Take the #2 guy, put him in whatever color list he's on, cross off anywhere else he appears, bonus chips...

Repeat this until the top-5 in one color list is filled, then cross off all names of that color.

Finish filling the other color.

No weight is given to either half.

Yes, it's possible that the #7 person one season gets in over the #6 person another season - even one who has higher points. Every method has its pros and cons -- the strength in mine is that it's season-neutral.

I dunno, that just sounds way too confusing. This is just what I would do...
1. Abe: 2500
2. Bob: 2400
3. Cal: 2100
4. Dan: 2000
5. Hal: 1500
6. Ina: 1000
7. Jen: 500

and

1. Ken: 2600
2. Abe: 2400
3. Len: 2200
4. Bob: 1900
5. Nat: 1500
6. Peg: 1200
7. Sam: 900


So the top 10 would be...
1. Abe: 2500
2. Bob: 2400
3. Cal: 2100
4. Dan: 2000
5. Hal: 1500
6. Ken: 2600
7. Len: 2200
8. Nat: 1500
9.
10.

Since Bob and Abe made the top 5 in both seasons, now we gotta figure out who gets the 9th and 10 spots. I would just add up the points from both seasons combined for the rest of the players and pick the players that has the most points...

Ina: 1000
Jen: 500
Peg: 1200
Sam: 900

(Since there's only one total, we'll skip the adding up thing.) I'd award the 9th and 10th spots to Peg and Ina.

So...

1. Abe: 2500
2. Bob: 2400
3. Cal: 2100
4. Dan: 2000
5. Hal: 1500
6. Ken: 2600
7. Len: 2200
8. Nat: 1500
9. Peg 1200
10. Ina 1000