Analysis of the Development regarding Singapore Xiangqi Open
Analysis of the Development regarding Singapore Xiangqi Open
Are we talking about a demotion system before a promotion (to encourage more graded players to join Group A each year) system ?
The actual problem facing by SIXGA each year is how to select Top 4 or Top 20% of Group A players to be considered for International events as Singapore players.
To justify for the funding, SIXGA wishes to have at least 20 (?) players for Group A each year.
Hoping to have enough Group A players, this is one of the reasons for SIXGA to try out having Group B twice a year for three years from 2009 to 2011 initially with a review later.
Currently, SIXGA is working hard to encourage more graded players to participate in Group A each year and not ready to consider a demotion system as Hong Kong at the moment.
I am open to a demotion system as Hong Kong especially all graded players must participate at least once in every 2 years unless having approved reasons or (more...)
Add Subtract Formula
[2009 to 2011]
-For funding issue, why don't add more rated players to Group A from Group B first,when surplus then subtract? XQ has one strategy --- stabalise the situation before attacking.
-Rating and qualifiying are 2 different things. A winner who becomes GM but thereafter does not participate in any local tournament is not good for the local sports. Based on our internal discusssions on the draft for tournament systems, the main idea is for rated players to be active and contribute to the local XQ scene,either playing in tournament or promotion of XQ etc. Tournament participation is not the only qualifier. Normally, these people could be able to influence more people to participate.
-From a pure funding point of view, why don't merge all groups together but modify the methods of selection
Stage 1 - 2 Groups(Qualified rated/Unrated + Unqualified rated)
Stage 2 - Top 8 from each group plays in elimination rounds. This allows new strong players to immediately able to reach the top of crops instead of the need to undergo through a few stages before achieving the same end. This may prompt more to join.
System should be in placed to dis-incentive strong rated players from joining unqualified rated Group intentionally. Anyway, with the globalisation trends around the world, this is a risky strategy to employ.
-For funding issue, why don't add more rated players to Group A from Group B first,when surplus then subtract? XQ has one strategy --- stabalise the situation before attacking.
-Rating and qualifiying are 2 different things. A winner who becomes GM but thereafter does not participate in any local tournament is not good for the local sports. Based on our internal discusssions on the draft for tournament systems, the main idea is for rated players to be active and contribute to the local XQ scene,either playing in tournament or promotion of XQ etc. Tournament participation is not the only qualifier. Normally, these people could be able to influence more people to participate.
-From a pure funding point of view, why don't merge all groups together but modify the methods of selection
Stage 1 - 2 Groups(Qualified rated/Unrated + Unqualified rated)
Stage 2 - Top 8 from each group plays in elimination rounds. This allows new strong players to immediately able to reach the top of crops instead of the need to undergo through a few stages before achieving the same end. This may prompt more to join.
System should be in placed to dis-incentive strong rated players from joining unqualified rated Group intentionally. Anyway, with the globalisation trends around the world, this is a risky strategy to employ.
Huasing Association 1999 - 2013