Change in Major of Mons

(message from the organizers of the Major of Mons)

This year, qualifying on Saturday afternoon will also involve the open category. But all players will not have to go through qualifying.

Let me explain:

On Sunday, we'll play with schedule ready in advance:

96 players in open, 32 veterans, 16 in U19 and U15, 12 in U12 and in women.

Best ranked players in each category will directly be qualified for Sunday: 80 open, 24 veterans, 12 U19, 12 U15, 8 U12 and 8 women.
The final list will be announced at the close of registration.

Others must go through qualifying round on Saturday.

Of course, the organizing committee reserves the right to change the number of participants in a category in function of registration numbers.

Is this valid and confirmed by the professional and provisional FISTF BoD?

Great news
I already booked mons with 5 other players from my club, something like that should be done already when the application comes in. We even have 1 player who only will play individual, it could be a very expensive trip for 1 game for him.
People complain that they want more games, and now you go to the biggest tournament and play maybe only 1 game?

Heinz

Admin wrote:(message from the organizers of the Major of Mons)

This year, qualifying on Saturday afternoon will also involve the open category. But all players will not have to go through qualifying.

Let me explain:

On Sunday, we'll play with schedule ready in advance:

96 players in open, 32 veterans, 16 in U19 and U15, 12 in U12 and in women.

Best ranked players in each category will directly be qualified for Sunday: 80 open, 24 veterans, 12 U19, 12 U15, 8 U12 and 8 women.
The final list will be announced at the close of registration.

Others must go through qualifying round on Saturday.

Of course, the organizing committee reserves the right to change the number of participants in a category in function of registration numbers.

I am also very unhappy with this. Not only for me but for my wife and son. How to play

I guess a lot depends on whether the "qualifying round" is straight knockout or groups with top player(s) to qualify to Sunday.

The first option is a very poor choice but the 2nd one not so bad maybe.

you are right but it didn't sound like that, but that would be ok, but it would mean at least 3 more rounds on saturday after the team event!?

Heinz

Martin Hodds wrote:I guess a lot depends on whether the "qualifying round" is straight knockout or groups with top player(s) to qualify to Sunday.

The first option is a very poor choice but the 2nd one not so bad maybe.

Leste year we had 59 veterans. 24 games Sunday only. Thus, the 35 players play off 8 squares in group 5 rounds it would be

Olivier Pere is the competition manager of Mons.
His decision is probably the qualifying round.
I wrote last year that the solution with barrages in Saturday is wrong for low ranked players.
Olivier is a fantastic man a fair player a clever sport director but he must follow other solutions.
People want more games and no 2 different speed relations between good and bad players.
If the tables are 32 then the participations will stop in 128 in open and in 32 in others categories.
A good solution is to stop the extra time. After draw the penalties. 15 minutes in every round is about 2 hours per day.

Of course, the aim of this change is to give more matches to a majority of players.

Thus, qualifying round will be played in groups of 4 as far as possible.

And on Sunday, excepted in open, it will also be group of 4 (or even 6 in U12 and ladies).

I made simulations and when till now, about 30% of the players had only 2 games, the new system will allow to reduce this at less than 10%.

Another problem we had before was that 50% of players from categories had only 1 game on Sunday. That will not happen anymore.

A last advantage: no more forfeit on Sunday as a list of substitutes will be dressed after Saturday.

Don't think that this reform has not been thought.

Just 2 points to finish...

- If number of veterans is still increasing, may be we would play with 48 players on Sunday (with 36 directly qualified).
- Just an example, last year we had 120 open. With new system, 80 players qualified for Sunday. And qualifying round with 10 groups of 4 --> 20 qualified --> 4 barrages --> 16

Hi Olivier,
thanks for the clearification that sounds much better.

I'm happy to come back to Mons again after some years.

Heinz

oli wrote:Of course, the aim of this change is to give more matches to a majority of players.

Thus, qualifying round will be played in groups of 4 as far as possible.

And on Sunday, excepted in open, it will also be group of 4 (or even 6 in U12 and ladies).

I made simulations and when till now, about 30% of the players had only 2 games, the new system will allow to reduce this at less than 10%.

Another problem we had before was that 50% of players from categories had only 1 game on Sunday. That will not happen anymore.

A last advantage: no more forfeit on Sunday as a list of substitutes will be dressed after Saturday.

Don't think that this reform has not been thought.

Just 2 points to finish...

- If number of veterans is still increasing, may be we would play with 48 players on Sunday (with 36 directly qualified).
- Just an example, last year we had 120 open. With new system, 80 players qualified for Sunday. And qualifying round with 10 groups of 4 --> 20 qualified --> 4 barrages --> 16

After all, Mr. Olivier Père does have some time to post in this Forum.
I wonder why he didn't reply himself about all those problems in the FISTF Calendar.
It is a bit strange, at least for me...

All the problems are difficult to understand, even for Olivier. It wouldn't be good if Olivier had to write the explanations of the Board's decisions. Even if he doesn't agree on some things, he has to keep neutral.

Oli wrote on this forum that he accepted the FISTF position but he would not be writing on here about his work. So I think we must respect that decision.

Martin Hodds wrote:Oli wrote on this forum that he accepted the FISTF position but he would not be writing on here about his work. So I think we must respect that decision.

I respect Olivier's decision, but I can't accept or understand it, when we have a lot of problems related with the FISTF Sports Department.

Of course nobody of us is really interested in what Oli all in all think about FISTF-finances, communication or all the situations in the affiliated Subbuteo-countries, etc., but I can understand Luís´ opinion, too. Yes...

Luis Filipe Horta wrote:

Martin Hodds wrote:Oli wrote on this forum that he accepted the FISTF position but he would not be writing on here about his work. So I think we must respect that decision.

I respect Olivier's decision, but I can't accept or understand it, when we have a lot of problems related with the FISTF Sports Department.

Of course it would be interesting to know how such decisions happened.
Maybe the CoN could take its part and ask for information.
The most important is that the members of FISTF (the associations) are aware of the situation.

Thossa wrote:Of course nobody of us is really interested in what Oli all in all think about FISTF-finances, communication or all the situations in the affiliated Subbuteo-countries, etc., but I can understand Luís´ opinion, too. Yes...

Luis Filipe Horta wrote:

Martin Hodds wrote:Oli wrote on this forum that he accepted the FISTF position but he would not be writing on here about his work. So I think we must respect that decision.

I respect Olivier's decision, but I can't accept or understand it, when we have a lot of problems related with the FISTF Sports Department.

If Oli posts some decision of Sports Department on a forum, you will immediately see several people saying this is wrong, you should do this, blahblah. Heinz and Vincent more than anybody should know this.

It happens on all forums so I understand his decision perfectly.

Luis Filipe Horta wrote:After all, Mr. Olivier Père does have some time to post in this Forum.
I wonder why he didn't reply himself about all those problems in the FISTF Calendar.
It is a bit strange, at least for me...

Sorry but i will give a point to Felippe. Olivier wrote that he has not time to post in forum but he find time for his tournament and no for the serious problems in sport department. I know that his 3 proposals rejected and we don't know why.

Sorry but the system of Mons is a small problem for about 100 persons but for the rest 1000 players around the world the great problems is about CALENDAR RANKING AND FREE PARTICIPATION.

What is more important? I waited more responsible position for these problems.

Martin Hodds wrote:If Oli posts some decision of Sports Department on a forum, you will immediately see several people saying this is wrong, you should do this, blahblah. Heinz and Vincent more than anybody should know this.

It happens on all forums so I understand his decision perfectly.

So can you explain why he answer for the system of Mons?
I ask informations. I can understand if Olivier don't wants comments for his job. So if he decide don't answer in comments i will accept his selection. But i want informations by the sport department.

totally right, i think it is more than enough to read the forum to get some good ideas maybe, but in the moment when you start to discuss or explain several decisions you already lost.
it is a difference to clearify something posted by somebody about his tournament (he maybe even wouldn't post that here) or to discuss about decisions taken in the posrts department.

Martin Hodds wrote:If Oli posts some decision of Sports Department on a forum, you will immediately see several people saying this is wrong, you should do this, blahblah. Heinz and Vincent more than anybody should know this.

It happens on all forums so I understand his decision perfectly.

To me the difference between a post as an organiser of a tournament, and a post as a Sports Director, is huge. You can't talk of those things on the same day.

It's almost the same as asking why all the other tournament organisers on this forum don't write about everything else here also.

Would it maybe have been better, if Oli hadn't declared the system in Mons? I'm quite sure he will think twice next time.

For FISTF decisions the problem is the official communication. Sports Departement can't do anything to that with 1 vote on the Board.

Seeing Olivier as the person to solve the problem of communication is wrong. Olivier always explains his decisions and proposals in the official communication with the Board.

The CoN was created to solve these problems with the Board, and I'm still waiting for the first results. It's time for CoN to show if it's really worth any big decisions (and not about for example a goalkeeping decision, which should be Sports Department subject for now).

Sorry for the off topic, but I'm really angry about this attitude towards a person who really is the Boards only irreplaceable piece at the moment, and who really does concrete work (not just words) for the game.

As you can see from this system in Mons, he really cares for the players and the game. Let him concentrate on the work he has been appointed to.

After the decisions are made in the future, I'll try to inform the people here about them.

Communication is not easy when you are in the Board. In the past, I experienced that because:
- sometimes I spoke as FISTF president
- sometimes I spoke as the vice-president of the belgian association
- sometimes I spoke as a club organizer
- sometimes I spoke as tournament manager
- sometimes I spoke as a player
According to the situation, my interests could be very different and some people did not always understand my point of view. For instance, as a player, I really don't care about Greece but as a FISTF Board member, it was a big worry.

von K. wrote:To me the difference between a post as an organiser of a tournament, and a post as a Sports Director, is huge. You can't talk of those things on the same day.

It's almost the same as asking why all the other tournament organisers on this forum don't write about everything else here also.

Would it maybe have been better, if Oli hadn't declared the system in Mons? I'm quite sure he will think twice next time.

For FISTF decisions the problem is the official communication. Sports Departement can't do anything to that with 1 vote on the Board.

Seeing Olivier as the person to solve the problem of communication is wrong. Olivier always explains his decisions and proposals in the official communication with the Board.

The CoN was created to solve these problems with the Board, and I'm still waiting for the first results. It's time for CoN to show if it's really worth any big decisions (and not about for example a goalkeeping decision, which should be Sports Department subject for now).

Sorry for the off topic, but I'm really angry about this attitude towards a person who really is the Boards only irreplaceable piece at the moment, and who really does concrete work (not just words) for the game.

As you can see from this system in Mons, he really cares for the players and the game. Let him concentrate on the work he has been appointed to.

After the decisions are made in the future, I'll try to inform the people here about them.

Only 2 more comments:

1) Major of Mons has its own website. I think this is the proper place to add all information about the Major itself.
2) It is sad for our sport when the BoD hides behind the lack of information.

My intervention in this subject ends here.

Vesa:
For FISTF decisions the problem is the official communication. Sports Departement can't do anything to that with 1 vote on the Board.

Vesa you have bad information. I heard that Olivier cann't vote because he is not elected!
Nobody attitude towards Olivier. We want information by Olivier for the sport department only, no for all FISTF departments.

Vincent
For instance, as a player, I really don't care about Greece but as a FISTF Board member,

Sorry Vincent but you were FISTF president. I don't care your opinion as player, competition manager, belgian vice president, organiser , and as president of your club. I cann't accept a dr Jekyll and mr Hyde opinion. Maybe you confused with so many roles.


1) Major of Mons has its own website. I think this is the proper place to add all information about the Major itself.
2) It is sad for our sport when the BoD hides behind the lack of information.

Second point for Felippe. His comments in target.

I can see and third road for the future. After the "proffesional" road and the "ex-traditional road" more people look for the road to future.

I just want to say you should focus your complaints to the correct persons. Pere is responsible for Mons, not the FISTF communications. But as the other Board is doing more Sports decisions than their own work, it's like this.

And I add, if the BoD is not working, it's CoN who should intervene, and if it doesn't help, it's EGM (which is soon coming).

Luis Filipe Horta wrote:
1) Major of Mons has its own website. I think this is the proper place to add all information about the Major itself.

Of course, but I don't get this. It was Vincent who wrote the information in the first place, then people got angry, and Olivier explained, and people were happy. What is the problem?

Forums are very important way of information in our game. Shouldn't they be used? Should all organisers just be banned from having information here...

Luis Filipe Horta wrote:2) It is sad for our sport when the BoD hides behind the lack of information.

Yes it is. But it's not the Sports Department that is hiding.

This forum is not official information place for FISTF, so where should Olivier write the information? The FISTF site is the communication's directors or secretary's or general secretary's job. And the only one writing there is Catania.

Kostas, if Pere has no vote (I don't think he knows this either) how could he write anything official about anything? Where did you hear this?

(I don't know how a provisional Board excessing its period unlegally and being 2+1 members short since Rain, can say that he has no power because he is not elected.)

Vincent,
I can easily understand the difficult situations. In a small sport/game it's impossible to have so many active people that the Board members are not players, organisers of events etc. It's much worse than Jekyll and Hyde, and I think Olivier has done correctly (to minimize misunderstandings) to distance the Sports Director from this forum, and only write here as an organiser.