Sunday 20 April 2014

Related Articles

No related articles found

Readers’ Comments

162Monday, 14 April 2014 03:10

How do you start an online game?

161Wednesday, 12 March 2014 11:34
World and European championships provide ideal space for maneuvring, both in terms of number of sessions and participants. Purely random (still with constraint of team or country) scheme does not seem to reasonable at all -- though to use it as a part of any other scheme looks acceptable. IMHO, best scenario is: equally-matched scheme to days 1-2, then top 20-25% struggle within a group for prizes + side-event for the rest of players.
160Wednesday, 12 March 2014 10:09
But what about the idea to split a tournaments in two at certain point? (One can use "stepping", for instance, cut top-24 after session 4, then top-16 after next session, then top-12 etc.).
In ma-any other sports it is quite acceptable that "toppers" play THEIR event fighting for the prizes while all others may play in "side-event" which still may gather a bunch of players (and may be processed separately, with lower MERS coefficient).
And, surely, such schemes are pointless for 1-day events.
159Wednesday, 12 March 2014 09:57
Second day may require more time between session to organise proper sitting. Please, be careful here, "more" in this case means that 15 min is no good though 20-30 minutes is quite acceptable. Current software provides "no-problems" seating (say, in 5 min) for 6 sessions starting from 32 players, 8 sessions -- starting from 60 players. More players-sized 2-day events are welcome (they are easier to be calculated)!
158Wednesday, 12 March 2014 09:52
Now, let's move to "longer tournaments" as stated.
2-days event may use 6-10 sessions, depending on rules, transportation factor (somebody needs to catch a train?), cultural program etc. Sophisticated software (like RiTour.exe) may produce seating for the first 4 session right "on spot", so the first day is "clean" for organisers. Of cause, provided there is no protocol errors.

What is luck???

I cant agree to what Tina says. If i play a tournament im always focused and concentrated even if i lose, because i want to minimize my loses. You never had a game where you didnt make any mistakes but lost (you counldnt win a hand and had to pay tsumo)? Although you are focused you can lose!!! Of course its easier to play when you are in first place then in last, but it has nothing to do with your level of concentration! The question is how would you define luck? Its really hard to answer that question (at least i cant). The problem is the differentiation of luck and randomness. You get a good starting hand; no luck. You get 10 good starting in a row; luck. But between 1 and 10, where ends the randomness and where starts the luck? And which hand was won by skill and which by luck? Its a mind game, thats totally true but it has luck involved and this luck is not part of concentration, its just luck!!! In the end i have to say nagare/tsuki dont make sense and its okay if you call it pure superstition but do you believe in god? He cant be seen and for many it doesnt make sense to believe, but why are there so many religious people out there?????????? Not everything can be explained with mathematics!
This is a comment on "Digital vs. Occult"

Mahjong News | Copyright © 1997-2014 | About Us | Sitemap | Contact