Here Omahant. A thread for all your formats for the hurling and football. You have so many it would be very easy to compare them if all in the one thread. Why not post them all here to help with comparisons...

DonaldDuck (Tipperary) - Posts: 544 - 18/06/2018 16:26:14    2112714

What an utterly passive aggressive thread. If you don't like what the guy writes, don't read it.

Morty (Westmeath) - Posts: 209 - 18/06/2018 16:42:23    2112728

catch22 (USA) - Posts: 2148 - 18/06/2018 16:54:10    2112731

Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4207 - 18/06/2018 16:54:32    2112732

DonaldDuck (Tipperary) - Posts: 544 - 18/06/2018 18:30:46    2112770

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2570 - 19/06/2018 11:34:58    2112999

Oh, and I forgot my 'GPA 8x4 with a Twist' -
Draw one '2 seed' and one '3 seed' with EITHER a PAIR of '1 seeds' OR a PAIR of '4 seeds' to each of 8 quartets. This is to avoid '1 seed v 4 seed' pairings and potential hammerings.
Then, the top 2 from the strong 4x4 could get the 8 byes from the 24 proposed to advance.
For distinction, I'd call the strong 4x4 'groups (1 to 4)' and the other 4x4 'pools (5 to 8)'.
In the AI KO Rd of 16, I'd have these pairings -
4x Group Winner v 4x Pool 2nd (or the Group 3rd that beat them); and
4x Group 2nd v 4x Pool Winner (or the Pool 3rd that beat them).
For each quarter of the draw, I'd have 6 teams from 6 different quartets to ensure non-repeat pairings before the AI SFs (and possibly in the SFs as well, where possible).
The AI KO 16 to Groups 1 to 4 only in the following year in a mouthwatering 'Open Draw'.

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2570 - 19/06/2018 12:24:06    2113024

Wow, to have a topic on the poster - that is the sincerest form of flattery.
Btw, what are the chances that Donald is Ormandbanner in clone form - or at least a cousin where brainless misery is an end in itself ?
Here in the US, there is freedom of expression - it's ok that following a critique of my views, it is fair not to agree - but one needs to reflect and not just leap - just because.
OK, I am probably viewed as a one-trick pony (formats) but I like to think there is some value.
And everyone, Wham is just as prolific as me with these ideas - the best was most recent, merging 4x8 NFL, KO Provs and the AIC.

To be fair, for a 'tournament' style AIC, I like my 'Super 18' (6x3) idea best - a lot of attractive Inter-Prov pairings leading to 12+4 Prov Champs in an AIC KO 16. With weaker counties competing for Sam via Provs, they also have a competitive tourney at their own level where they could 'go up' to the Super 18 in the following year (2nd path to Sam).
My 2nd choice would be the '2+6' (that you described) if I am forced to stay in a straight jacket for simple minds.
Ultimately, we are on the same page wanting a season-long regular season (merging NFL, Provs and AIC) leading to KO AIC. My version is a 12-match season with 2x16 equal strength Conferences with the top 6 in each forming separate halves of the AIC KO 12.
omahant (USA) - Posts: 1162 - 19/06/2018 11:34:58Its not flattery and drop the insults.
I simply find someone who solely posts sometimes rather ridiculous competition proposals a bit silly.
I also find it strange that you want such symmetrical regions and disregard the provinces history and past.

DonaldDuck (Tipperary) - Posts: 544 - 19/06/2018 12:43:04    2113034

As I said, complaining for the sake of it - anyone reading my ideas knows I keep the lopsided Provs to maintain tradition (e.g. Provs played in parallel with Super 18 and the driver of the 2+6) - I try to counter the imbalance elsewhere. There seems to be symmetry (football) only in the GPA idea but that was already baked before I tweaked.

I take back the insults, sorry - just that unrelated Ormand had no problem dishing it out without giving much thought to my ideas.

I think I have less AI SHC ideas - I will post again my 'flagship' idea soon.

Cheers.

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2570 - 19/06/2018 13:05:10    2113045

My main AI SHC idea, I call the 'Super 10'.
Have current Muns 5 and Lein 5.
Play traditional Provs on a KO basis - each with
1 QF, 2 SFs and 1 Final.
Two 'mixed Provs' groups of 5 are formed, as the Prov KO pairings unfold.
Put the Muns QF winner in Group X, and their QF and SF opponents in Group Y.
Split the other SF teams - one to each group - so that Muns Finalists are in different groups.
Do the same for Lein - with their QF winner placed in Group Y.
Each group now has 5 teams - complete all 'XvY' pairings, so each team plays 5 matches.
Of the 25 matches - 6 are all-Muns, 6 all-Lein and 13 are Inter-Prov.
Top 6 of 10 to AI KO - as this is not necessarily top 3 from each group, dead rubber risk is lessened.
AI SFs (targetting non-repeat pairings)
1st in X v (2nd or 3rd in X); and
1st in Y v (2nd or 3rd in Y).
The 4th in one group replaces 3rd in the other, if necessary.

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2570 - 19/06/2018 16:49:37    2113138

With Joe McD Cup now established, the two finalists could be added to the Liam McC Cup, so there is 4 teams in each half of the KO 8.

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2570 - 19/06/2018 18:17:42    2113160

DonaldDuck (Tipperary) - Posts: 544 - 19/06/2018 18:49:12    2113169

I would see some merit in 8 groups of 3;

Seed 1 - 8 provincial semi-final losers.
Seed 2 - 8 provincial quarter-final losers from Leinster and Ulster.
Seed 3 - 8 provincial round 1 losers. (4 preliminary round losers from Leinster and Ulster. 4 provincial quarter-final losers from Connaught and Munster.)

Round 1; Seed 2 team v Seed 3 team.
Round 2; Seed 1 team v Round 1 loser. (If Round 1 was a draw, tie break free taking competition at full time. Free taking competition loser to play in Round 2. Both teams still awarded a point each in the group for the draw.)
Round 3; Seed 1 team v Round 2 winner.

8 group winners to advance to the Super 8.

This is not my preferred format of many options but it is one that can work within current structures. Round 1 teams battle to ensure place in Round 3. Round 1 loser still have hope but it'll be a tough position to win the group with Round 3 teams knowing what they have to do on the final day.

legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 7821 - 19/06/2018 20:30:59    2113193

legendzxix (Kerry) - Posts: 7821 - 19/06/2018 20:51:59    2113194

Yes, I like that, but dead rubber risk is greater in 4-team groups (maybe the middle round could have Rd 1 winners go head to head to reduce potential).

As for your 3-teams, 1 advance - while the '1 seed plays the Rd 1 winner' in Rd 3 ensures no dead rubber, as you say it's a tough mountain to climb for the Rd 1 loser.
Two advancing from 3 works better, I think - if one team wins Rds 1 and 2 - Rd 3 is winner takes all.
If Rds 1 and 2 split - team not playing Rd 3 could still sneak in provided they have competitive scoring difference (no hammering taken) and depending on Rd 3 victory margin.

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2570 - 19/06/2018 21:25:18    2113201

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2570 - 19/06/2018 22:55:08    2113226

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2570 - 19/06/2018 23:01:20    2113228

Legendxxix - I know how very passionate you are about holding onto 4x4 - but do you agree that 3-team groups are better in that they can fully eliminate 'dead rubber' risk ? Even with one advancing and the Rd 1 loser with little chance, as you showed - who cares - isn't it Rd 3 'winner-takes-all' regardless ? The solution to the 4-team problem is to have at least let some 3rd placed teams in (or ALL as in the GPA proposal).
Dead-rubber risk is lower in the World Cup because of the higher likelihood of draws.
Given my argument, would a 15 or 18-team 'Super phase' be better - that is, 5x3 or 6x3 ?
Furthermore - it should only be '6x3 with two advancing' only, because adding 4 KO Prov Champs (played separately) makes it a perfect 'AI KO 16' (with 4 Champs most likely getting byes to AI QFs instead) - doesn't everybody win in this perfect fair system ? Over to you, my fellow bloggers - Legendz and Wham, in particular !

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2570 - 20/06/2018 00:28:07    2113245

Omahant

This is some friendly advice.

I think some of your formats can be a little over complicated. Some of the ones that aren't overly complicated you sometimes explain a little bit unclearly. It's easier if you take 1 round at a time and explain exactly what is going on. The short hands 2+6 or 12 and Provincial 4 aren't meaningful outside of me and you pretty much.

I think sometimes your formats are interesting theoretically but don't address some of the real issues in the scheduling problem.

For instance you 3 groups of 8 qualifier system that eventually leads to 6 qualifiers is let down by the fact that it's still hard to schedule club fixtures around the games. At the start of a season a county board will have no idea at all which weekends in which they will be playing.

One of the big pluses about the rejig of the hurling was a simplification of the fixture plan. Football needs to follow suit and ditch qualifiers. They cause a lot of problems as teams have many more potential weekends they could play and many never get used. They go to waste for club competition because you can't schedule matches at such short notice.

I think your formats would go down better if they were more based in identifying the problems in the current structures and looking at ways to fix them.

This post is not intended to be insulting in any way. It's just some constructive advice.

Whammo86 (Antrim) - Posts: 4207 - 20/06/2018 17:15:54    2113404

Thanks for your suggestions - I used short hand as I have been flogging the same dead horse for a while and thought everyone is tired of the 'known' details. I am assuming bloggers are paying more attention than what is probably true in reality.
Also, not all are as competent as you in breaking down the finer buts - which I overlook.
Now let's storm the GAA to get some of our best combined points implemented - wouldn't that be nice - no longer need to feel we've just wasted energy - Cheers and thanks.

omahant (USA) - Posts: 2570 - 20/06/2018 17:49:31    2113410