>I comprehend the PL promotion rules. My problem is that there are too many qualification scenarios. By your own admission, they are "quite complicated."
I indeed said that the Pyramid League qualification is 'quite complicated', but I don't say it is 'too complicated', because in my opinion it isn't. Like I already said, the qualification is written down clearly into the rules, what should make it able for everyone to understand, maybe by asking TC a question.
>Players should be judged based on demonstrated performance, and not on theoretical ability. If a player wants to play in a high PL division then they need to sign up for the PL. It is not fair to the players in the PL to let players qualify for a higher division from other tournaments because you are implying that non-PL results are just as meaningful from a PL perspective.
By the Pyramid League qualification process people are actually judged on what you call 'demonstrated performance'. Only players with one or more good results will be able to join a higher Pyramid. For the first Pyramid League (2017) we used a lot of older tournaments for the qualification, but for the upcoming Pyramid League(s), we will only use the results from the past year, what comes really close to your 'demonstrated performance'. Secondly, the Pyramid League wouldn't be the Pyramid League if you could just sign up for it (that would make it a 'random-group-round-robin' tournament). By adding all these qualification rules, we are able to make a few different groups, so you will play people around the same level you are. Your statement 'non-PL results are just as meaningful from a PL perspective' is true in a certain way in this context, but if you do not use other tournaments as qualifiers and you don't want to use the ranking it is quite difficult to fill in the different Pyramids purely by last year's Pyramid League's results.
>The ProSeries is a bad idea. I believe it was your idea and I am not criticizing you as a tournament manager, I have run bad tournament ideas too. The TC tries way too hard to be novel: masters divisions and TRPs were scrapped for the PL, the CL format was changed, the ProSeries had tiebreakers rules involving the number of pieces, the TC adds a new format every year, etc. There is no tradition within the TC. Part of the reason the OWC is popular is that they have a format and stick to it. Now I am not saying you guys should never try anything new, but the TC makes changes too frequently.
Like I said, I indeed took part in setting up the whole PRO Series, but I do not see it as a bad idea. Also, what is wrong with new ideas? TC will never change something if there isn't a good reason for that change. Again, I don't understand why you want to be 'traditional' if something can be improved or renewed. Then, there are quite some 'fixed' items at the TC Schedule.
>With the ProSeries added to the schedule I can play in the following tournaments over the next year: CL, PL, WT, 4 ProSeries Events, Backstabbers, 3 NASF events, OWC, and the World Team Tournament. That is 12 tournaments. I play as much Stratego as about anyone on here, but there is no way I have the time to play 12 events. I am going to have to pick and choose. Other people will too, which will lead to lower participation. Ultimately, having a robust player pool makes a good tournament, not the organizers. I would like to point out that only 34 players register for the ProSeries, so turnout is already down.
I do not get the point you are making that 'you should be able to play in every tournament'. Some people will only play in one tournament a year, others will play in every tournament hold. That will remain the same, regardless of the amount of tournaments you have. Actually, I was really happy to get 32 players for PRO Ladder, I was surprised about the amount, expecting maybe 20 participants. You should understand the Stratego community isn't yet big enough to have only tournaments with more than 50 participants. Indeed people might be picking and choosing their tournaments of preference, but that will still be the case if there are only 8 tournaments for example. I completely agree with Don_Homer's saying here 'And what is wrong with pick and choose? We should not prevent pick and choose. Its far better than wanting to play but nothing is provided.'
>The median finishing player played 5 games in Backstabbers. ProSeries Perfect has 5 games. I am proposing scrapping the other ProSeries events so that leaves only the PL.
What's wrong with this smaller tournaments? You indeed scrap 4 events in name by scrapping PRO Series, but together they take equal time as the whole Pyramid League. Actually you are proposing to have 2 Pyramid Leagues a year, what gives no net change to the 'tournament weeks' or 'tournament games'.