It’s not necessarily coming across as sour grapes that you lost, more that you have an issue with the arcade / way tournaments are ran in general.
The simplest solution if you don’t enjoy it is just don’t go, BUT then there are your comments
These two comments conflict.
You’re either playing them just for practice and experience - in which case badly run tournaments (in your opinion), incorrect decisions (in your opinion), poorly maintained machines, are all experiences that you may come up against in almost any tournament and it would benefit you to learn how to deal with them.
If you’re playing them just for the SCS - ANY pts gained will go towards your total (within a 20 tournament cap). If you’re playing more than 20 tournaments in the season, that would indicate to me that there’s enough tournaments and variety for you to pick and choose which ones you enter, and can ignore the ones you don’t find enjoyable.
From previous threads, it appears you can’t just remove yourself from a tournament.
I also think it’s wrong that you appear last and everyone get’s a bump. The fact that you have played some games will influence the results of others (for better or worse).
At the point you decide to leave, all games after should be recorded as 0, and your finishing position calculated from that, and submitted to the IFPA as such.
I would class myself as an experienced TD. It’s NEVER a decision taken lightly to change the format mid-comp. Not only could it be seen as favouring an individual it’s also a pain to have to explain to everyone the changes.
I’ve done it twice in major(ish) comps.
At the Pinball Battle at EXPO time was a factor with a hard deadline being set.
The final was originally set for just a single game, but due to things running smoothly there was enough time for a best of 5 final. This was ‘suggested’ to both the finalists and there were no arguments.
The other time the format was based on the World Cup, and I had to change the format/rules twice during the event. Qualifying was made up of 8 groups of 4. However on the day there were that many drop outs that only 24 players turned up.
I had to basically create a whole new format off the top of my head.
I randomly created 3 groups of 8 with each player playing each other once. The top 2 from each group and then the best 2 3rd placed players would progress to the next round.
The problem came that after the qualifying and the top 2 had been removed - 1 group had 2 players on 5 pts (who could be split with a head to head), the other 2 groups had 6 players on 4pts each (which couldn’t be split with countbacks or head to head records). There simply wasn’t enough time to find which of the 6 players on 4pts would progress - so I progressed the 2 players on 5 pts. Which I thought was the only fair and logical thing to do.
The problem comes when you know that I was one of the players on 5pts, AND on countback I lost my head to head in qualifying. So had the 6 player decider taken place I wouldn’t have progressed. What makes it even worse is that I then went on to win the rest of my matches and win the whole tournament.
Everyone was gracious and understood why I had made the decisions I made, but I still get ribbed about it now 3 years later.
The reason I give these examples, is that if a player had come to me with complaints in the manner portrayed here, I may well have decided to not to run any more comps at all.
The upshot is either support the TD, and offer suggestions to help, or don’t compete. Certainly don’t throw your toys out of the pram and ask for a refund and to be removed from the competition - as that does come across as sour grapes.