Subject: If you like the Micky theme as is...

Date: Fri Jan 6 22:57:52 2006
User: Laffman
Message:
I've posted my last ditch effort at Hotel Netcell for saving the Micky in its current 32-game, 25-minute format. There's a good chance my enthusiasm for the current Micky format is unshared by anybody, but it's definitely unshared within the crew, so if you want to join my "Save the Micky" campaign, please visit HN (via the link below) and let your opinion be known.

*Note: Don't worry, even though I said "Save the Micky", I'm only talking about the current format. One way or another, there will still be a MIcky theme - I'm just hoping it will be one way, instead of another.

Link: HN: If you like the Micky theme as is...

Date: Sat Jan 7 13:11:32 2006
User: AllKnowing
Message:
Is there any point responding?

I've seen many good suggestions and preferences aired in discussion. Yet, the borg collective seem to think they know what's best for us and will do as they please, regardless.

Date: Sat Jan 7 13:20:46 2006
User: Restless
Message:
Well, they've made a few modifications already based on what the people here have suggested, so I don't think they're as parochial as you indicate.

You do realise you can't please everyone all the time, don't you? You do? Just checking.

Date: Sat Jan 7 13:23:52 2006
User: ElGuapo
Message:
"what's best for us?" this is freecell. it's a game. methinks you have issues with authority figures.

no idea why i'm responding to an anonymous pot shot, but does it seem strange to you that Laffman's asking for public input on this, given our apparent plan to "do as we please?" all part of the conspiracy i guess.

.sigh

Date: Sat Jan 7 13:30:08 2006
User: AllBewildered
Message:
I'm with AllKnowing. Totally agree. Just a suggestion. Since you named the tournament after her, why not ask mickyiw what she thinks?! Counting you that makes 3 of us, Laffman. Right? With only 3 other members of the borg collective (as AllKnowing put it) that should make it a 3-3 tie. (borg collective?)

Date: Sat Jan 7 13:39:49 2006
User: Restless
Message:
So what's the right strategy, then? Every time someone posts a new idea on here, the RC must implement it straight away otherwise they're being ignorant? If AllKnowing, AllBewildered or AllBinLaden wanted something changing, what makes you think that the majority would agree with your suggestions either?

The RC have so far handled their difficult task with dignity and behind-the-scenes hard work, and all of your negativity and confrontational posts aren't helping.

Date: Sat Jan 7 13:45:08 2006
User: AllBewildered
Message:
Now I am really confused. As I was posting, two others posted between AllKnowing and me. Didn't know the Micky had already been messed with. I'm still with AllKnowing. That makes two of us for sure. How we voting, AllKnowing? ElGuapo may not know who you are, but I do. I think?

Date: Sat Jan 7 14:09:52 2006
User: mercury
Message:
I know I know. I don't play tournies very often. But I do occasionally when the insomnia is strong. Like this morning. I played a standard tourney. 18 games if I remember right? 25 minutes. All 8x4. I only had time to look at 17 of them. (with the help of a little lag) It got me thinking that perhaps that's where the support for the old micky format lies. People do like to try and finish what they've started. It's disappointing to see that time has run out and there are games you've not even looked at yet. There are probably some out there who look forward to the micky because it is one they were always able to finish. The way it's set, some players may not be even see 1/3 of the games in the current 25 minute format. Is it that now the tournies are setting up more heavily for the speed players, rather than the average ones?

Date: Sat Jan 7 14:25:47 2006
User: WRAC
Message:
I guess it's a good thing the Crew went into this project without any illusions that we'd be able to please everyone!

That said, after we first took over the schedule, I thought we did a pretty good job of listening to suggestions and implementing what we thought were the most popular ones in Round Two. You may or may not agree with all the changes (and I don't like all of them myself), but I believe the evidence is there that we went with the majority opinions. This policy will continue in the future. For example, we are now strongly considering lengthening the Wides, following suggestions made by SAB and ninjamouse that were met with general favor in the "Longer Wides -- please" thread.

You also might be interested to know, as 20% of the Crew, I really don't give any weight to complaints or suggestions made by names such as AllKnowing or AllBewildered. Are they even different people? How do I know they even play tournaments? On the other hand, if I see a suggestion from someone such as SAB, whom I often see participating in tournaments, I take their comments very seriously.

Finally, assuming borg is short for bourgeois, I strenuously disagree with the label borg collective. In any case, I believe it holds far more credibility than the anonymous collective.

WRAC

Date: Sat Jan 7 14:36:09 2006
User: Laffman
Message:
This would be less bewildering all around if people would use their regular nicks. Say what you will about the RC - we don't hide who we are or where our opinions are coming from.

As for the suggestion, " Since you named the tournament after her, why not ask mickyiw what she thinks?", I'd actually love to hear her opinion on this because she's the kind of speedster I think might actually relate to my argument for keeping the existing format, but I consider her opinion already invited along with everyone else's. Remember, the "Micky" theme is so-named as a compliment to her, but having it named after her doesn't make it hers. She certainly deserves the compliment, but to be honest, I've always thought that tourney label subtly but inaccurately implies that Micky's dominance is only on the fast, easy games that some people consider click-fests. In fact, I think she's equally dominant on the hard games when she sets her mind to it, but I get the impression that sort of race (like a Threat or Freakout) just doesn't hold her interest as much. Regardless, the Micky as a theme belongs to all tourney players, just as all themes belong to Micky.

If I could, this would be one of those threads I'd try to transfer to HN where I hoped to pursue it in the first place, but it just so happens this is one of those uncommon days where HN's hosting provider is experiencing intermittent outages, so the board won't even load at the moment. To anyone running into that problem - sorry for the inconvenience. The good news is the provider is usually pretty good about getting stuff like that fixed pretty quick, so I have my fingers crossed it'll be back to normal soon.

Date: Sat Jan 7 14:42:03 2006
User: MissAmericanPie
Message:
I like it at 25 minutes. And thanks for asking.

Date: Sat Jan 7 14:51:32 2006
User: CubicSprock
Message:
I think it should be expanded back to it's original 45 minute form. Those that like it at 25 and can solve all the games in 25 minutes will still be able to do that. All they lose is the opportunity to play another tournament right after that. Honestly, that's not much of a loss...one tournament which most people probably wouldn't play anyway. Those who don't like the micky might want it at 25 minutes just so they can play in the other tournament, but given there are already over half a day of quickies that doesn't hold much water in my opinion. Plus, putting it back to 45 minutes you can cut out a few of the micky's so they only take up the same % of the schedule.

Date: Sat Jan 7 15:29:55 2006
User: EZ-Ed9
Message:
I don't play many tournaments. But I do love the micky. I am accurate but also slow. I don't take pleasure in the micky when I don't have a chance to come close to finishing all the games. I agree with Mercury and Cubic.

Date: Sat Jan 7 16:03:01 2006
User: mickyiw
Message:
Firstly, I think it’s good that you brought this topic to FreeCell discussion and not just Hotel Netcell, Laffman. I’m sure I’m not the only person who doesn’t frequent Hotel Netcell and therefore many would miss out on the opportunity to follow and possibly pursue this thread.

There are a couple of references from both sides to the RC which I agree with.

AllKnowing: I've seen many good suggestions and preferences aired in discussion. Yet, the Borg collective seem to think they know what's best for us and will do as they please, regardless.

Restless: You do realise you can't please everyone all the time, don't you? You do? Just checking.


Restless also said. …So what's the right strategy, then? Every time someone posts a new idea on here, the RC must implement it straight away otherwise they're being ignorant?
The RC have so far handled their difficult task with dignity and behind-the-scenes hard work, and all of your negativity and confrontational posts aren't helping.

Isn’t that what Denny was accused of doing, on this very board when he didn’t jump right in and make changes on demand? Did this board become a dictatorship, Restless, where people aren’t allowed to air their opinion if it conflicts with the RC?
I’d very much doubt they’d agree with that.

WRAC: Finally, assuming Borg is short for bourgeois, I strenuously disagree with the label Borg collective. In any case, I believe it holds far more credibility than the anonymous collective

I read the Borg collective as being a reference from Star Trek, one brain many voices; though I’m sure AllKnowing will correct me if I’m wrong. I do quite like your interpretation of it too.

However, I would be interested to know how the RC decide which changes to make to tourneys and for what reasons. How many people make a majority? Does majority rule? Who has the final say? Though, taking an interest in understanding the workings of such decisions will probably be turned around that I’m making accusations of some kind of conspiracy on the part of the RC.

As for the Micky tourney. I completely agree with mercury and CubicSpock; in its previous format of 32 games in 45 minutes, I believe it was an ideal starter for people new to the tourney scene, to those who wanted to improve their speed playing, or to those who like to finish a tourney. This isn’t about those who can finish it in less than 25 minutes regularly. So what if they have to wait for the next tourney to start, that’s what players have to do now if they miss the start of one of the longer tourneys.

I think it’s already a major hassle to find out what tourney theme starts when, and that’s partly why I haven’t played much over the past month or so.

I know I’ve gone way past the goldfish limit, but it’s been a while since I’ve posted so I saved my word allowance for future use.

Date: Sat Jan 7 16:03:41 2006
User: Laffman
Message:
I really hoped to have this discussion at HN, but today's intermittent access is making that sorta tough. I appreciate MissAmericanPie's, CS's, and EZEd's comments, but they didn't really speak to the issues I raised in my argument, which are about number of games as well as time limit, and also about why I think the Micky is specifically well-suited to a restrictive time limit, and should not set the bar so low that any average or slightly above average player can expect to complete all the games, which would make it not very different from a Quickie. I get the feeling no one's really digested the particulars of my argument yet (because they haven't mentioned any of them), so even though I wouldn't normally duplicate that post here, I will because the intermittent access to HN is making impossible to continue this discussion there. ::grumble::

[begin Laffman's first post in HN thread, "If you like the Micky theme as is, now's your chance..."]

In the course of crew discussions about tourney length and number of games for Wides, Zanies, and Micky's, I find myself the lone voice of dissent in the case of the Micky, which everyone but me is leaning towards reducing the number of games for, given how many players have called for fewer games so more people can solve them all before time expires. I'm mostly resigned to losing this battle, but with crew consent, I want to present my argument in favor of keeping the Micky at 25 minutes, 32 games, mainly because I know I'm the only one who feels that way in the crew, but I don't know if I'm the only one who feels that way, period. If anyone else agrees, now's the time to speak up.

My argument boils down to the fact that pretty much every other theme already has time limits so generous that several players are able to max out on solutions, so it's a good thing to have at least one tourney with a restrictive time limit, where number of games solved actually does determine the winner more often than the "tiebreaker" of who got all the solutions fastest. (If it were "tourneys according to laffman", they'd all be that way, but I'll settle for the Micky.) I intentionally put "tiebreaker" in quotes there, because the only reason they bear any resemlance to ties most of the time (in Mickys) is that the leader ran out of games to play.

Imagine a player who can consistently solve about 20 games in a 25-minute Micky. By leaving the game total at 32 games, that leaves twelve more plateaus for them to aim for and reap satisfaction if they achieve, but if we just reduce the number to 20 (and that's just an example, not a planned number), then sure, more people will "finish", but if it still took them the full 25 minutes, that seems like a diluted accomplishment to me, because instead of coming from improved performance, it came from lowering the bar. Meanwhile, the Micky loses its appeal to top speedsters, who find 32 games in 25 minutes quite a challenge even if no other top speedsters are competing, but who would get a victory but no excitement over beating the same field to a total of 20 which they and several other players always expect to get.

In some themes, number of games and time limit noticeably affect the competitive landscape, because of leaving enough time and opportunity for harder games to sometimes give less speedy players a chance at catching up and passing the early leaders later in the tourney. For the Micky, there's very little difference in the competitive landscape whether there are 5, 10, 15, 20, or 32 games, so I'm in favor of keeping the restrictive time limit, which results in a kind of challenge, and outcome based on solution totals more often than fastest times, that is mostly lacking in other themes. Also, the Micky feels to me like the one place where I can play practically the whole time every tourney, without either finishing early with lots of dead time, or else spending a disproportionate amount of the time on just a few games or even a single game down the stretch. Some people find the Micky to be an unappealing "clicking contest", but I'm at least one person who doesn't, and I think the mindset that wants to decrease the number of games is the mindset that already doesn't find it appealing, and if that's the predominant mindeset of the decision-makers, it could spoil some of the Micky's appeal for the people who already like it, while doing very little to make it more enticing to people who already dislike it.

For the record, I'm not in favor of increasing the Micky back to 45 minutes or making it 55 minutes like other themes. I might be if we could have more than 32 games per tourney, but that's capped by the programming (which we have no control over), so I think 25 minutes is the sweet spot for our max of 32 games, and it wouldn't be worth losing other tourney slots for a diluted Micky.

Okay, I took my shot. Fire away.

[end post]

I'll close with a new question, meant seriously, not rhetorically. If making sure everyone gets a chance to see every game at least once and has time to solve all the solvable ones before time expires is a top priority, then how would you feel about cutting the number of games for *all* themes in half, while leaving the time limits untouched? (Remember, it's just a hypothetical, not an option under active consideration.) By my way of thinking, that would give more people a better chance at gathering up all the available solutions, but if you think something would be lost or diluted as a result, then whatever that is you're losing, it's what I think top speedsters would be losing by lengthening the Micky or decreasing the number of games.

Date: Sat Jan 7 16:15:09 2006
User: Laffman
Message:
Sometimes another post comes along before yours goes up that changes things. (Note the identical timestamps on my and Micky's posts.) Thanks for you comments, Micky. I'll still be sorry to see the current Micky change, but the evidence is pretty strong that what I find so appealing about it's current form has much less appeal to pretty much anyone else, including it's namesake. There were about three people I thought maybe (but only maybe) would share my opinion about the current Micky, and Micky was one of them, and one of the other two is extremely unlikely to be around and weigh in, so I'm willing to concede that my ship isn't just leaky, it's sinking. I'm not swearing off Micky's or anything, but I enjoyed the current format more than the extended format, so I'll be sorry to see it go. Oh well, win some, lose some.

Date: Sat Jan 7 16:49:22 2006
User: Kaos
Message:
AllKnowing wrote: "Is there any point responding?

I've seen many good suggestions and preferences aired in discussion. Yet, the borg collective seem to think they know what's best for us and will do as they please, regardless."

I'm sorry you feel this way. As the newest member of the ratings crew, we have tried to find the consensus and implement it. Or, failing that, we've tried to please as many tournament players as we can. If you see a suggestion made that you like that hasn't been implemented there may be a number of reasons:

1) We are waiting to make the change. Especially over the Christmas and New Years breaks, we've left things sit as they are for a while. Plus, we've been focused on getting ratings automated so that has futher delayed the next round of tournament changes.

2) We don't think it is the majority opinion. This is definitely subjective since most players don't offer comments. Even when we ask, the comments usually digress and there may only be three pertinent responses and one will differ from the other two.

3) We just don't like you.

OK, I'm kiding on that last one. Denny was wise to farm this off. Lots of complaints, minimal thanks, and lots of work.


mickyiw wrote: "However, I would be interested to know how the RC decide which changes to make to tourneys and for what reasons. How many people make a majority? Does majority rule? Who has the final say? Though, taking an interest in understanding the workings of such decisions will probably be turned around that I’m making accusations of some kind of conspiracy on the part of the RC. "

Excellent question. At the moment, we are operating like a jury - trying to reach a unanimous opinion before making a change. In some cases, there may be one strong opinion and others don't care so a change will get made. In other cases, we get deadlocked so a change might get tabled until someone gives in.

I found the comment about the Borg collective amusing. We are more like an Economists Convention: "Five voices, Six Opinions."

For what it is worth, here were my opinions on the micky tournament (with number of games first/ time duration second) 16/25 first, 24/25 second, 32/55 third, 32/45 fourth and 32/25 last. Definitely not aligned with Laffman at all.

We defintely welcome morre feedback.

Date: Sat Jan 7 17:08:46 2006
User: MissAmericanPie
Message:
I was not aware that the crew was considering reducing the number of games. I am strongly not in favor of that at all. If people enjoy the idea of being able to finish all the games, then increase the time limit back to 45 and reduce the overall number of micky tournaments. Or let them play the super tounaments. With the supers and the quickies, we should have plenty of tournaments already in which everyone can finish all the games if that's what they're mainly after. Please, DO NOT reduce the number of games in the micky!

Date: Sat Jan 7 18:01:36 2006
User: SDBaroon
Message:
I have to weigh in here because I WAS one of the people who could just not miss a Micky tournament. With the way it is now, despite the fact that I can win most of the time, it isn't the same as it was when you'd try to get all of the games done and then see how many people did it faster.

This way, it's play, play, play and then, (here's my problem with it) all of a sudden the tournament board changes to the next tournament and you're all out of sorts. This has happened a few times with me at the beginning of this new schedule. I'll be playing a Micky, lose track of the time, not finish and then go into the Threat a half a minute behind everyone else with the Micky mindset and fall further behind. Maybe it's only me, but having time to finish them all and then "relax" into the next one would be good for me, so I'll vote for the original 32/45.

Date: Sat Jan 7 19:48:26 2006
User: mickyiw
Message:
Thank you for you response, Kaos. You've explained what happens when the RC decide what's in and what's out (as pasted below). However, how does the idea/option get that far?

Like now, there's debate about the future of the Micky. And what I'm reading here is that the majority of those posting would prefer it restored to its original format. How much of this will be taken into account when the juries out? Or is it irrelevant because extending the current time limit isn't an option being considered by the RC?



I wrote:However, I would be interested to know how the RC decide which changes to make to tourneys and for what reasons. How many people make a majority? Does majority rule? Who has the final say? Though, taking an interest in understanding the workings of such decisions will probably be turned around that I’m making accusations of some kind of conspiracy on the part of the RC.

Kaos wrote: Excellent question. At the moment, we are operating like a jury - trying to reach a unanimous opinion before making a change. In some cases, there may be one strong opinion and others don't care so a change will get made. In other cases, we get deadlocked so a change might get tabled until someone gives in.

Date: Sat Jan 7 21:01:42 2006
User: Kaos
Message:
mickyiw wrote: "Thank you for you response, Kaos. You've explained what happens when the RC decide what's in and what's out (as pasted below). However, how does the idea/option get that far? "

Boy, I may have to go over my goldfish limit to answer this one. Also, please note that my previous answer - although trying to represent how the RC operates - may not be as everyone else on the RC would have phrased it.

Initially, most or all of the tournament changes grew out of discussion here - in particular the Freecell Wish List thread (started by Sheikh_Yerbouti?). This was followed by the UK Players thread started by WRAC where he wanted to give more access to the theme tournaments to players in different time zones around the world. Laffman also took the suggestions from both places and created a new forum at HotelNetcell for futher discussion. Those sources lead to the first round of tournament changes. The second round of changes was triggered primarily in a post here by Denny (when the Threat and Micky were cut in length among others). After that, we've tried to go a bit slower in making changes. The Threat and Freakout tournaments got the most comments - and the most consistent responses - so that's what happened next. Since then, as I said, we've been working on automating the ratings. Now that that's done, were back looking at another round of tournament changes.

Contrary to what many may think, we read and discuss all suggestions. It's just that, like Denny, this isn't a full time job. So, suggestions may not get acted upon in a timely manner.

mickyiw asked: "Like now, there's debate about the future of the Micky. And what I'm reading here is that the majority of those posting would prefer it restored to its original format. How much of this will be taken into account when the juries out? Or is it irrelevant because extending the current time limit isn't an option being considered by the RC? "

I think all of this will be taken into account. We, (Laffman) started this thread here because we did not have any consensus on what to do with the Micky. Any of the formats I mentioned (16/25, 24/25, 32/55, 32/45, and 32/25) are a possibility. So, the more votes cast, the better.

Date: Sat Jan 7 22:25:27 2006
User: WRAC
Message:
I thought Kaos did an excellent job of summarizing how the Ratings Crew works.

The only point I'd like to add is that, in the beginning, some people accused us of moving too quickly, and I'd have to say they were correct. How can players know what they like and what they don't if they haven't had a chance to try it for a while? And then there's the fact that some people find the schedule confusing. Hey, if we made changes every week, then they'd really find it confusing! So please don't think we're not listening. If I haven't thanked people for each and every comment, it's only because I didn't want to become unbearably redundant. So thanks and keep the comments coming!

On the subject of the schedule, I'd like to think people will start to remember things like, "Oh yeah, Thursday at noon, that's a Potluck," and from there they'll gradually come to know where their favorite themes are. It will never be as simple as it was, but you can't have simple and also give people with a variety of life schedules a chance to play at reasonable hours. The main purpose of the new schedule was to accomodate the latter. And, as Buffy pointed out, you can always bookmark the schedule for easy reference.

WRAC

Date: Sat Jan 7 23:32:17 2006
User: EllieMay
Message:
Count me as voting for going back to the 32/45 Micky tournament. I think SDBaroon's posting gives an excellent explanation of the reasons some of us prefer the old format to the new.

I would like to add that, when you know you aren't going to have time to play all the games, that selecting the games to try becomes part of the tournament strategy, and that changes the nature of the tournament. I like the straightforwardness of just playing all the games, in order, knowing that all the other players are going to play all the same games.

Date: Sat Jan 7 23:50:15 2006
User: Laffman
Message:
It's obvious my enthusiasm for the 32-game, 25-minute Micky hasn't been contagious, and I'm okay with that, but for the people supporting a return to the longer time limit (as opposed to reducing the number of games in 25 minutes to something like 16 or 20 games), my question is whether there would be any objection to making it 55 minutes. It's not like keeping it to 45 minutes would make room for any other tourneys, and the extra ten minutes would give even more people a chance at completing all 32 games, right? A 45-minute limit would make it match it's original form, but would be less accommodating to the priority of making it finishable than a 55-minute slot would. Are there any arguments why 45 minutes is better than 55 minutes that don't contradict the complete-ability arguments?

Disclaimer: Answers to the above may sway me one way or the other, but the questions shouldn't be taken as evidence of which way the crew as a whole is leaning. Those are Laffman questions, not crew questions.

Date: Sun Jan 8 02:02:10 2006
User: aprcosta
Message:
I think we should respect the experience and the regulars of the old schedule. In this way it was a great thing that most majors tournaments were kept (Masters, Threat, Freak) and even improved (Traditional).

But as to the Wides and the Mickys, it seems to me they were treated as second category tournaments, beeing shortened and object of all kind of new experiences (Super/Zany).

As SAB pointed, we used to ask for longer Wides (even WRAC asked for it in the early days) and for removing the narrows. The Wides were reduced to 25 min, with no narrows, and the narrows got a 55 min slot all for themselves.

About the Mickys, I was never very fond of them. I am a slow player and the best I ever got was to finish 29 games. But we should care about the regulars and give them a 55 min slot also.

In short:
1. Mix Wides/Zanys and extend them to 55 min.
2. Extend the Mickys to 55 min, respecting the time/games proportion they had as a 45 min tournament.

Date: Mon Jan 9 22:13:49 2006
User: kenwa
Message:
I agree with Laffman 100% . I have just recently started playing the tournies and like the micky in particular. I have yet to complete all 32 games but look forward to the day when I will :O)
I would also like to see the ratings resumed on this one.

Kenwa

Date: Mon Jan 9 22:14:19 2006
User: kenwa
Message:
I agree with Laffman 100% . I have just recently started playing the tournies and like the micky in particular. I have yet to complete all 32 games but look forward to the day when I will :O)
I would also like to see the ratings resumed on this one.

Kenwa

Date: Mon Jan 9 22:29:03 2006
User: CubicSprock
Message:
As far as the challenge of completing all 32. Or getting a new high for games completed, I really can't see this as a big incentive. I don't see how this is in anyway greater than getting a new best time for solving those 32 games.

I've never done that well at micky's (one lifetime win in old version). But have always enjoyed them, but never gotten much chance to play them since monday is a bad day for me. I see it more in a time sense that games sense, obviously as opposed to laffman....where I find it more natural to compare myself based on times. Even if the final game results were differing in number for a micky I'd convert the games to time per game to see how far the gap was in a time sense and not a game sense.

My rankings based on the apparent option are #1 32/45, 2nd is 32/25, 32/55, 24/25.

Date: Tue Jan 10 06:35:57 2006
User: kangaroo
Message:
I've been away for a few days and by way of disclaimer this is my first posting in this thread (and my first reading of it). I'm paranoid enough to believe that someone may think I was responsible for one or some of the early responses here.

I support what Laffman is doing and think that one theme could be set aside for this purpose and this seems the ideal one. I also agree with MAP - don't reduce the number of games. That said, I don't know why there just can't be (both) some long mickys and short mickys anyway.

Date: Tue Jan 10 15:18:56 2006
User: socc2
Message:
I'm in your camp Laffman. I've been playing the tournaments here for a couple years now. And the Mickys are my least favorite format.

A while back I stopped playing the 32gm 45min Mickys. Personally I enjoy the formats that require more problem solving than speed. The Mickys did indeed feel like "clickfests" for me. Whether I finished in 25 mins or 30 mins or 35 mins didn't really matter. I would rarely win but always be left with a sore tired arm. So I figured I better start a freecell weight training program or give up the format.

The new Mickys (32gm 25min) are a lot better for me. I still don't love them but I find them more fun with the new format. The 25min limit makes finishing all 32 games a real challenge. I will still rarely win but at least if I finish the 32 games I feel like I've accomplished something in exchange for my throbbing arm. Plus it's nicer to look at the standings and see a few people with 32 wins and the others with less, as opposed to seeing 27 people with 32 games completed.

For the record, I think all the recent tournament changes have been great, and I thank all the people who run this site. You've given me many, many, many hours of "time well wasted".

Also, just because I don't like the Mickys personally, doesn't mean I have anything against speed players. I've learned there's a lot more to speed playing than simply being a fast clicker, so I do respect the speedsters on this site. I guess the Mickys just aren't my cup of tea.

Date: Tue Jan 10 17:35:37 2006
User: Laffman
Message:
Freecell tourneys are often analogized (both on consciously and unconciously) to conventional races, with the implicit assumption that "going the distance", or "finishing", means completing all the solvable games before time expires. Naturally, that view of the race leads to a sense of feeling deprived if time expires before you get to go the distance. I accept and recognize that as a valid perspective, but the primary criteria for tourney standing - how many games a player solves, regardless of the solution time a player accumulates - implies another "finish line". By that critera, the finish line is the time itself, so unlike a marathon analogy, where the only way to finish is to complete the entire course, a tourney is a special kind of race we don't have any convenient running analogies for, in which everyone would have the same time to run, and whoever ran farthest would be declared the winner. (In practice, the other kind of finish line is what usually counts, but that's not because the tourney rules force it to be that way.) The only way you don't finish by that criteria is if you stop competing before time runs out. By *that* criteria, anyone who has to stop competing before time expires - because they run out of road (games) to keep running on - is deprived of finishing the whole race. The marathon is often the race analogy of choice for these things, and I think it fits many themes, but the Micky is more like a mile. If I ran a marathon, I'd want as much time as it took to finish if I were in good enough shape to go the whole way, but if I were a miler interested in testing myself against a 4:00 or 5:00 pace, it would be unsatisfactory to institute that amount of time as a pre-arranged limit for how long we got to run, but enforce a maximum distance of a half or quarter mile, to accomodate the runners who want to join faster runners on the track, but aren't fast enough to travel a mile in that time. In a marathon, people aren't really sure if they can finish, so very generous time limits have borad and important appeal, but does cutting a mile in half really improve the sense of accomplishment for joggers or walkers? Also, if the race is practically a wind sprint to begin with, is there much chance of making it more appealing to marathoners by making it a *longer* wind sprint?

I appreciate the comments on both sides, and even though I still feel in the minority, it at least doesn't feel like a minority of one, which is always nice. ;) I'd still be very interested to hear from someone who has listed 32/45 as their first preference (like CS) why they'd prefer 45 minutes to 55 minutes. (Note to aprcosta: extending to 55 minutes while retaining the games:time ratio of 32:45 isn't an option, because programming limits us to a max of 32 games for any tourney, but thanks for the suggestion. That cap on max games beyond the crew's control.)

Date: Tue Jan 10 22:10:08 2006
User: CubicSprock
Message:
I really don't have a great reason for why I'd prefer 32/45 other than that it's the way things originally were. I also liked the traditional thursday the old way, but there is a significant difference there as the new thursday favors the skill players (vs. speed players) more since it's more likely to have at least one very tough deal.

Anyway, I wouldn't say I'm strongly in favor of extending the micky. I have no idea when they are, which is something on my part (having no idea what the schedule for 25 minute tournies are). And if extending tournies is going to mean less of the longer tournies, I'd be more tempted to vote the micky into a 25 minute slot. Sadly it will mean I'll never get the chance to complete the same micky with 2 nicks, I'll have to break the news to TheKid gently.

Date: Tue Jan 31 04:19:55 2006
User: mickyiw
Message:
Is there any update on what will be happening to the tourneys still under review?

Micky

Date: Wed Feb 1 17:46:09 2006
User: Laffman
Message:
Sorry for the slow response, but we're so close to our next announcement I was hoping to slide by without having to pre-announce the announcement. The crew are putting the finishing technical touches on the next round of changes that will be described in detail a few days before they go live. I'm guessing we'll be ready to announce within a week, but it's a group effort and our individual real lives occasionally delay our group progress, so we appreciate your patience.

Date: Mon Mar 20 15:50:44 2006
User: peter75
Message:
Apologies if this has already been covered but is there a plan for the Micky's to be rated. They have been at 55 min for some time and I for one prefer this format. Sometimes I can get under 25 minutes but normally its under 30 minutes but as I believe i'm one of the quicker players the time limit should be 55 to accomodate all speeds/abilities.

Date: Mon Mar 20 16:08:35 2006
User: WRAC
Message:
Sorry for the delay, but we're still trying to figure out the best length for the Micky. At the moment, we're considering it as a 40-minute tourney in a back-to-back slot (per mercury's suggestion).

As soon as we feel the length is settled, we'll announce the resumption of ratings.

WRAC

Date: Wed Mar 22 02:35:15 2006
User: ninjamouse
Message:
I think 40 minutes is ample time for a Micky, and I also think we should go with what mercury and mabb suggested with the 40 min. back-2-back tournies for 4 themes.

RC: I reckon you should just go ahead with this proposal and start rating these again. I'm sure the majority of people/mice will be happy with this.

I don't want to sound impatient but, judging by the amount of time it takes just to get a true rating in a theme, I really think we should start pressing ahead with it. (squeak)

Date: Wed Mar 22 11:50:18 2006
User: Laffman
Message:
Think of these schedules as cakes being baked by committee. After much public and private deliberation about what kind of cake everyone will like most (and/or hate least), the crew finalizes the list of ingredients, does a few test bakes until it comes out right, and then serves it up for people to eat. When a discerning and thoughtful taster (or tasters) offer suggestions for new ingredients, or different proportions of existing ingredients that they think would make the cake even better, the team of dessert chefs (the crew) may agree, but they can't just change the cake on the table - they have to bake a new cake.

We're baking as fast as we can. Oh, look - I think I spilled some b2b on my apron. Mmmm...can you smell that whiff of All-in-Ones in the air? Well, back to the kitchen. Cake don't bake itself.