Agree, I mostly liked the format and the “don’t have to start after 9” clause. The lack of lines for Open [and not-too-bad ones for Classics], added free time, and earlier finishing time were all plusses over prior years. Even the Open-vs.-Classics playoffs simultaneous issue Sunday wasn’t too bad. The one thing I would change is to add 2 “joker” games, like many European events do, to give you a last chance to fix that weak score or two. So with 9 machines, it would be 20 games total, 2 tries on each plus 2 jokers. I’d restrict the jokers to not be on the same game.
I’d like to see some distinction in prize money between rounds eliminated, e.g. pay 17-24 more than 25-32, 9-12 more than 13-16.
The starting time change for Classics from 8 a.m. Sunday to 10 a.m. needed a bit better word-getting-around than it got. But the 10 a.m. time was a big improvement!
I’d like better Classics games. Aerobatics could have been replaced with one of the 4 (yes, 4!) Sinbads in the show, and that Mars Trek played pretty coin-flippy, too. PP, LC and TZ were fine. Why the %#@%&# can’t we get better Classics machines for the tournament when there are always some good ones in the show? Gotta get on Mike’s case.
I’d also like to stop having Classics subsidize Open, or at least reduce it. Open should have taken in about $6K (~100 players at $60 a pop), but the total prize money in Open was more like $14K, while Classics only paid out $1900 I think. You know that had to come from all those Classics entries; 96 players with maybe 30-40 tries each on average at $10 for 3 tries works out to about 10K, which would make the math work for the total prize money across both events. Basically, we spent $10K on Classics and got back about 2, vs. $6K on Open which returned 14. So in the future, if it doesn’t change, unless you want WPPRs or a Disco-globe trophy, skip Classics completely, play Open and get subsidized.