Question Garrett, when you mention the 20 numbers in a doubles game vs. single, are you taking into account that doubles rounds are 24 discs total versus only 16 discs shot in a singles round. That would mean 33% more possible 20's wouldn't it? Anyway love the way you've covered this topic - especially pasting up the critiques like that. I can recall this "Aren't there too many 20's races?" coming up in Tavistock. A solution was proposed that we dispense with the 'no hiding' rule for open shots😲☹😳. Which had some logic for a non-player. But you have to be reminded why the 'no hiding' rule exists. Because open-shot hiding cripples the incentive for anyone to play this game more than once. Curling had to revise their rules when a flaw like this became apparent. If players, boards and especially discs become so efficient that perfect games are the norm then we may have to think about that variant demonstrated at the Elite Eight session where each player gets to place a disc somewhere in the 15 circle for starters. Cheers, keep up the excellent and abundant work you're doing. Much appreciated.
First off, I love this question ! And I apologize in advance for a lengthy response, because I want to geek out 😆 Yes and no- when looking at the singles and doubles preliminary rounds and the average 20s scored per game, I did consider that in a singles game a player would shoot 32 discs, while a doubles team would shoot 48. BUT, and this is my mistake, I put them on the same graph, so the averages for doubles were naturally higher (and not as accurate as it should be). So, I converted those averages to percentages to have a more accurate comparison between singles and doubles, and found two important things: Firstly, percentage wise, there’s on average, a similar amount of 20s scored in singles (approx 22%) and doubles (approx 17%). Different, but not huge. Secondly and more importantly, the correlation between points per game and % 20s scored is WEAKER than my original analysis (down to almost a .5 R2 value versus the .59 R2 value seen before), further supporting my point that 20s don’t necessarily matter in the preliminary rounds of Crokinole 😃 I do enjoy the variations of Crokinole with placing discs, and definitely think people should try it out as it’s a different experience- that being said I personally think we’re not quite to the point in which that’s necessary for competition (but that is a whole different topic, and I’ve already nerded out too much 🤣). Thank you again for the question and the kind words!
Thanks for a great video with very thoughtful analysis that is articulately conveyed. My suspicion (lacking any evidence) is that a very large percentage of such comments about Crokinole being nothing but an 'open twenties game' are coming from casual players for whom the issue is largely academic (grin). But there's one somewhat related topic that I thought was worth mentioning. If one truly dislikes the prospect of open twenties and wants to minimize them, there's always the 'One Disc' variant where you start a round with one of the participants placing a single disc on the board, typically within the 15's circle. I'm certainly not advocating this over the official game. But it is an interesting option to try. Though having done so, I definitely prefer the conventional game.
Cheers, thank you! There’s actually a fair amount of good players on both sides of the discussion (for good reason too, both sides have their merits). As for variants, I’ve played where both players place their first disc, I’ll have to try the single placement as well
I was thinking 'well what about Conrad?' until you brought him up. Good vid. I do feel that there could be some more innovation in playing styles to force a less of a twenties game but still searching for it
Ow also: I have lost games simply because my opponent missed a lot of twenties but left a horrible shot (not on purpose). So you can be good at twenties but If you're no good at converting a shot, you can still lose from a less skilled player.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I feel like Crokinole is similar to Billiards in this regard. In low and medium levels of play, pool players seldom break and run. There's a lot of back and fourth, which is more entertaining to watch in a lot of people's opinion. However, at higher levels of play, Billiards turns into a Break & Run game. This is to be expected in Crokinole as well. Higher level players are going to more consistently score clean 20s. Pro of Billiards: - Break and runs are still fun to watch because the way the balls break is mostly random. In Crokinole, clean 20s are always the same. Pro of Crokinole" - There's nothing you can do if your opponent break and runs. Nada. In Crokinole, the moment you miss, your opponent generally has to react. Both players see play and a player's miss forces a change in game dynamics. At least, that's my guess. Truth be told, I've watched zero billiard and crokinole tournaments...
That’s a good comparison, although I don’t watch billiards, I get the analogy. You really won’t see aggressive 20s games until you get to the peak of the game, and even then, it’s not very common
I believe a good question to ask is, "When two advanced and equally skilled players face off, what percent of the time does the loser of the 20s race ultimately win the round?" From my experience, that percent is low. Another way to think of it is that, as soon as one loses the 20s race, he or she needs to either hit one extra "big shot", or alternatively make one fewer mistake, vis-a-vis his or her opponent, merely to tie the round, and two extra big shots/fewer mistakes to win the round.
That’s the next thing I’m looking into 😄 it wasn’t included in this video because I wanted to keep it short, but the 20s race and the details / stats there are very important to this conversation. It’ll be fun to see what the exact numbers there are!
For the average at home with family recreational player, 20s only happen like 2 or 3 times a game…
Question Garrett, when you mention the 20 numbers in a doubles game vs. single, are you taking into account that doubles rounds are 24 discs total versus only 16 discs shot in a singles round. That would mean 33% more possible 20's wouldn't it? Anyway love the way you've covered this topic - especially pasting up the critiques like that. I can recall this "Aren't there too many 20's races?" coming up in Tavistock. A solution was proposed that we dispense with the 'no hiding' rule for open shots😲☹😳. Which had some logic for a non-player. But you have to be reminded why the 'no hiding' rule exists. Because open-shot hiding cripples the incentive for anyone to play this game more than once. Curling had to revise their rules when a flaw like this became apparent. If players, boards and especially discs become so efficient that perfect games are the norm then we may have to think about that variant demonstrated at the Elite Eight session where each player gets to place a disc somewhere in the 15 circle for starters. Cheers, keep up the excellent and abundant work you're doing. Much appreciated.
First off, I love this question ! And I apologize in advance for a lengthy response, because I want to geek out 😆
Yes and no- when looking at the singles and doubles preliminary rounds and the average 20s scored per game, I did consider that in a singles game a player would shoot 32 discs, while a doubles team would shoot 48. BUT, and this is my mistake, I put them on the same graph, so the averages for doubles were naturally higher (and not as accurate as it should be).
So, I converted those averages to percentages to have a more accurate comparison between singles and doubles, and found two important things: Firstly, percentage wise, there’s on average, a similar amount of 20s scored in singles (approx 22%) and doubles (approx 17%). Different, but not huge. Secondly and more importantly, the correlation between points per game and % 20s scored is WEAKER than my original analysis (down to almost a .5 R2 value versus the .59 R2 value seen before), further supporting my point that 20s don’t necessarily matter in the preliminary rounds of Crokinole 😃
I do enjoy the variations of Crokinole with placing discs, and definitely think people should try it out as it’s a different experience- that being said I personally think we’re not quite to the point in which that’s necessary for competition (but that is a whole different topic, and I’ve already nerded out too much 🤣). Thank you again for the question and the kind words!
Thanks for a great video with very thoughtful analysis that is articulately conveyed. My suspicion (lacking any evidence) is that a very large percentage of such comments about Crokinole being nothing but an 'open twenties game' are coming from casual players for whom the issue is largely academic (grin). But there's one somewhat related topic that I thought was worth mentioning. If one truly dislikes the prospect of open twenties and wants to minimize them, there's always the 'One Disc' variant where you start a round with one of the participants placing a single disc on the board, typically within the 15's circle. I'm certainly not advocating this over the official game. But it is an interesting option to try. Though having done so, I definitely prefer the conventional game.
Cheers, thank you! There’s actually a fair amount of good players on both sides of the discussion (for good reason too, both sides have their merits). As for variants, I’ve played where both players place their first disc, I’ll have to try the single placement as well
I was thinking 'well what about Conrad?' until you brought him up. Good vid. I do feel that there could be some more innovation in playing styles to force a less of a twenties game but still searching for it
Ow also: I have lost games simply because my opponent missed a lot of twenties but left a horrible shot (not on purpose). So you can be good at twenties but If you're no good at converting a shot, you can still lose from a less skilled player.
Cheers! It will be interesting to see if another player (or Conrad himself) brings a more defensive playing style back to the top ranks 😄
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I feel like Crokinole is similar to Billiards in this regard.
In low and medium levels of play, pool players seldom break and run. There's a lot of back and fourth, which is more entertaining to watch in a lot of people's opinion. However, at higher levels of play, Billiards turns into a Break & Run game.
This is to be expected in Crokinole as well. Higher level players are going to more consistently score clean 20s.
Pro of Billiards:
- Break and runs are still fun to watch because the way the balls break is mostly random. In Crokinole, clean 20s are always the same.
Pro of Crokinole"
- There's nothing you can do if your opponent break and runs. Nada. In Crokinole, the moment you miss, your opponent generally has to react. Both players see play and a player's miss forces a change in game dynamics.
At least, that's my guess. Truth be told, I've watched zero billiard and crokinole tournaments...
That’s a good comparison, although I don’t watch billiards, I get the analogy. You really won’t see aggressive 20s games until you get to the peak of the game, and even then, it’s not very common
I believe a good question to ask is, "When two advanced and equally skilled players face off, what percent of the time does the loser of the 20s race ultimately win the round?" From my experience, that percent is low. Another way to think of it is that, as soon as one loses the 20s race, he or she needs to either hit one extra "big shot", or alternatively make one fewer mistake, vis-a-vis his or her opponent, merely to tie the round, and two extra big shots/fewer mistakes to win the round.
That’s the next thing I’m looking into 😄 it wasn’t included in this video because I wanted to keep it short, but the 20s race and the details / stats there are very important to this conversation. It’ll be fun to see what the exact numbers there are!