Thursday 24 April 2014


Related Articles

No related articles found


Readers’ Comments

162Monday, 14 April 2014 03:10
Debbie

How do you start an online game?

161Wednesday, 12 March 2014 11:34
Vitaly
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
Vitaly
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
Vitaly
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
Vitaly
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.

Luck, skill, focus

> Although you are focused you can lose!!! Certainly! I never stated otherwise. Good for you that you are able to focus all the way through a tournament! It's a very important ability in any sport, both mind sport and physical sport! Still, many players aren't able to maintain their focus all the way through, particularly if they are losing. Many players show visible frustration when losing and this certainly affects their concentration. What is luck? Probably we all use the word a little differently. For me luck is when something of low probability happens. I make tsumo waiting for only one tile, while another player with a three-sided wait, who has been waiting for a longer time than me doesn't get his hand. That's lucky. If the player with the three-sided wait had won, was that then skillful play by optimizing his hand? We can't answer that without analyzing every tile picked and played. Maybe a more skillful player would have played my hand to a better wait? Maybe we both got the optimal from the tiles we picked and one player was just more lucky in getting the tiles needed? Luck is just luck (probabilities), sure. I agree. Skill is making the most of your tiles when you a not so lucky. Maybe my subject line was misleading. I believe what I wrote is true, that a player who had some bad luck may become frustrated and lose concentration, which means he makes some bad choices (which he doesn't necessarily notice!), and when he then loses again he feels very unlucky, but this "bad luck" he has brought upon himself by playing less than optimal. So bad luck can lead to bad focus which can lead to further losses which are easily interpretated as a string of bad luck. A player who is always able to keep his focus is not subject to this. Mahjong is about probabilities, skill and focus. Luck is in the probability part.
This is a comment on "Digital vs. Occult"

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