There’s been some talk on Spielfrieks about tournament scoring systems. Paul Sauberer suggested awarding chances at prize draw, instead of ranking points. Now that’s a neat idea! It could be worth using sometimes. Paul’s idea of five chances for winner with some bonuses for the length of games sounds good, too. That way winning every game, with any number of players, would be good, but longer and heavier games could give few more chances to everyone.
I’d like to award chances for other players than winners, too… Perhaps something like five chances for the winner, two chances for the second place and one for third. In two-player games, only winner scores. Each beginning hour of length awards extra chance to everyone, maybe?
Thus, a typical two-player game would give a player five or zero chances (expected value 2.5). A 90-minute four-player game would award six chances to winner, three for second place, two for third place and one for fourth place (expected value 3). Two-hour five-player game would give seven, four, three, two, two, with an expected value of 3.6 or so. One-hour five-player game has an expected value of 2.6… That sounds pretty good, I think. The longer games offer more chances to everyone, so they are worth playing. Removing the third-place extra bonus in four-player games might be a good idea to balance it a bit.
Then, in the end of the event, prizes are drawn. Those, who have played most and succeeded best (it’s good when system like this favours those who play a lot) have best chances to win prizes, but everyone who has played even some games will have a chance (I’d award one chance for everyone just for coming, so everyone can win). Of course, if several prizes are awarded, it’s probably a good idea to only allow each player to win only one prize.