i waited all day to play an ORIGINAL TOURNY,

in round 2 i was playing a newbie who was taking ages and the balls were all messed up, but i was winning by alot of points. like 60 - 10,

we got a time warning but the other player wouldnt speed up.

anyway my point is, why didnt i just go through coz i was in the lead.

1 other thing,
THERE SHOULD BE MORE ORIGINAL TOURNAMENTS. INSTEAD OF 1 AT 9PM....

I guess that means the time ran out.. You didn't go through because the server can't differentiate between a person with lots of points and a person with little points - therefore both players are disqualified.

The tournaments are run in accordance with the numbers playing each game type. Original and Regular have few people playing them - therefore they get few tournies. Arcade has lots of people playing it, so it gets loss of tournies.

See here for more information: http://www.funkysnooker.com/viewTopic.do?topicid=5034

it must be possible to get a BYE if your in the lead and time runs out. im realy annoyed i waited al day and got kicked out coz i was drawed against a newbie who was takin ages missin every shot.

Haha that made me laugh.

Well if you were 1 point up does that give you the right to progress? It would probs cause more time wasting. Plus the shotclock only allows for him to take 20 (or 25 in a marathon) so I don't buy that, you obviously wernt that far ahead, or you would have won by default.

Have fun waiting for tomorows

I would imagine 60-10 must be close to default.

I have been throught the same thing bigmilk and although it can be frustrating it is very rare, and IMHO on balance it is definitely the fairest way to work things.

Tourney wins are a great achievement and with the current format are rightfully earned.

i was well ahead, so you dont have to buy anything, why would i make a thread then lie and say i was winning!

Thats why i made this thread to see why i didnt win by default, so KOP dont comment on something you couldnt possibly know anything about. like what my score was.

"Calm down" "Calm down"

<Please do not be offensive or abusive on the forums, it could lead to your posting rights being revoked.-luckypot>

Edited by forum moderator luckypot, at 13:16 Mon 9/02/09 (GMT)

You should lose you're posting rights for that!

<edited as above>

Edited by forum moderator luckypot, at 13:17 Mon 9/02/09 (GMT)

And so should you for that grammar!

lmaooo

At least I didn't wait all day to play a tournament

I agree about the MAIN IDEA OF THIS FORUM!!


I was timed out today, well in the lead, and almost threw my laptop through the window into the snow for what happened at the timeout.

It was, to put a fine point on it, *enter expletive here*.

If the tourney can tell when your three snookers ahead why cant it tell who has more points when the timer runs out?!

ANGER!!!!

Simple answer, people will just time waste when get a big lead so the opponent can't get back into it. Simple.

But its not always the winning persons fault if they reach time- their opponent may, as already stated, be AWFUL, which slows the game down to a degree that you cant control!

AND it opens up the possibility for people behind to muck about and 'take down' the other guy- fair?

How will the game be able to know the difference between time wasters and genuine slow play?

It shouldnt matter- if you're winning, you deserve to go through to the next round!

The game cant tell between bad player and bad day/luck, this isnt any different

Probably the best idea is to have a chess-style clock timer for this case and the player who's time per shot is greater is disqualified.

However if people are getting disqualified often we need to increase the time per round.

I like the 'chess clock' idea although it doesn't cater for all cases e.g. if you are winning by, say, 30 points, all the colours are safe with one red left on the table and you have taken 1 second longer overall than your opponent - would it be fair for the opponent to go through?

It is a tough one, because you can come up with scenarios such as that which makes any solution 'unfair'. Saying that, I think that the benefit of implementing a solution that reduces the amount of double DQ's outways the negative of the occasional anomaly and after all, like any other rule, would be the same for everybody.

Sorry im new to this forum, didnt mean to offend anyone, but i dont like being called a lier.
i made this thread to see other peoples opinions on this subject,
not to be told that i wasnt in the lead and didnt deserve to go through, and that its "FUNNY" that i waited all day for a tourny? Whats funny about that?
Its not like i sat in front of my laptop from morning til night to play a tourny,

zwitterion, thanks coz i know how you felt, theres only 1 Original tourny a day, (except the speed 1) so was a bit gutted.

if theres a 20 second shot time limit, there should be a time limit for the whole game, and the one with the highest score goes through.

highest score goes through will lead to the leader purposely time wasting so they go through.

And nick, i don't like the chess clock idea because some players naturally play a slower game than most of us, e.g blutch (sorry mate just using you as an example). They play slower so what would happen then? He would get disqualified for being a little bit slower than his opponent?

Sorry but there is nothing wrong with the system as there is, because also the game finishes when more than 12 points in fouls is needed.

Plus there is more than enough time to complete a match in the allocated time. So i don't really see the problem?

How could you waste time if its only 20 seconds a shot anyway. to sort it out it could simply be 15 - 20 minutes maximum per game, then the leader wins, just like in a club.

ANYTHING WOULD BE BETTER THAN GETTING KICKED OUT.

i know this is your game and its excellent the way it is. im just trying to make it fairer.

this is the last il say about this. thanks