Hello
fellow pétanquers,
I
have been doing some research on the way other regions manage their
pétanque leagues. A few can produce draws while others are only
interested in the aggregate points score, 59-46 for instance. While
I am not necessarily a fan of these, I still think our current format
of two
points for a win and zero
for a loss is a little one dimensional.
The
only time an odd number of points may arise, is when a team have been
penalised for bad conduct. However, this can be easily be adopted in
any league format and very rarely occurs.
So,
at the moment in our current league set up, we have two points
for a win and zero for a loss. TWO possible outcomes... 2, 0.
Teams on the same amount of points (which happens a lot) are sorted
first by games difference then points difference.
My
suggestion would be to award three points for a win, one
(bonus point) for a 3-2 loss (the nearest thing to a draw) and zero
for a 4-1, 5-0 loss. THREE possible outcomes... 3, 1, 0. In this
format, teams are less likely to have the same number of total points
(once the season gets going) and makes for a more interesting league
table. Teams sharing the same points total, would be separated first
by the number of WINS, then by games difference and so on.
Another
way, would be to award one point for every game won within a
match PLUS one additional point for a win. SIX possible
outcomes... 6, 5, 4, 2, 1, 0. This system is the same as how the
City of Norwich Winter League operates but with a 'bonus point' for
winning the match (they do this sort of thing in the South Eastern
region).
Les
(from our club) suggested that we use the aggregate points
tally during a match instead of wins. Many possible outcomes and big
point totals!
Cyril
(also from Bressingham) had the idea of three points for a win
and one (bonus point) for an aggregate win if on the losing
side. THREE possible outcomes... 3, 1, 0.
I
have come across other scoring systems (some I couldn't even work
out) but they get unnecessarily complicated with breakdowns on types
of wins and so best be avoided.
I
would be interested to hear your views.
Dave
Smith @ Bressingham PC.
No comments:
Post a Comment