Re: Can we keep experimenting with scoring changes please?

I appreciate everyone jumping in with their opinion on this topic, and
for John keeping the discussion directed at the topic at hand.  It's
clear that the "old" regular scoring system has it's disadvantages. 
To me it's also clear that rally scoring has some significant
disadvantages also, most clearly that teams can coast to a win without
scoring a real point.  While coaching club, one season part of the
season we experimented with "modified rally scoring" where the games
were played to 15, and the first 10 points were rally scoring, and
then _both_ teams went to sideout scoring after one team reached 10. 
This had the unhealthy effect of providing one team with a huge
advantage up to 10, if they could get out of the gate quickly.  I
think the "one team is rally, the other is regular" has the problem
that the team that got to 24 first, then has to watch their lead
evaporate by the other team simply siding out.  One of the benefits of
reverse rally scoring is that it continues to be balanced.  But I do
agree that runs of points would probably be likely.

I guess it's just what you want to see/play.  I prefer to have the
ability to come all the way back when a team has gotten me down in a
hole, using my ability to side out effectively to get back in the
game, and sacrifice things like: watching a great server string a
bunch of aces together (relatively boring...), watch teams sideout
back and forth, back and forth, making less than their maximum play on
defense, because they have siding out to look forward to if they mess
up.

There have clearly been some good ideas presented here throughout the
thread.  I know John Kessel occasionally reads this group. (Or at
least he used to.)  Any thoughts on the scoring system in place now
John?  Any ideas on how to go about continuing to tweak it to make it
better?

-brad

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John McCabe) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 15:42:36 -0500, "Killer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> 
> >This sounded like an interesting topic when I first read it.  As I perused
> >the posts, the old memories
> >returned & I came back to this conclusion:
> >
> >This topic has been beaten to death.
> >This topic has been beaten to death.
> >This topic has been beaten to death.
> ><repeat>
> >
> >It took a goddawful amount of time for NFHS to finally come to the table, in
> >general, with the rest of the
> >world & my high school players no longer get punished for playing club ball.
> >Interestingly, I've yet to hear
> >ONE high schooler or Juniors club player say "I wish we still played the old
> >way."
> 
> That isn't surprising as they presumably haven't spent the number of
> years the rest of us have getting used to the old system! Apart from
> that, I don't think anyone is saying 'i wish we still played the old
> way'. What is being discussed are improvements to the new way to get
> round its disadvantages when compared to the old way. However the old
> way certainly had its disadvantages too - especially 3.5 hours matches
> with constant side-outs and no points being won!
> 
> 
> Best Regards
> John McCabe
> 
> To reply by email replace 'nospam' with 'assen'