Post by DianeE
When you have major basketball, golf, tennis, soccer tournaments the
entrants get "seeded" before the tournament starts. I doubt that anyone
would want to bother ranking all 44 songs in order of preference every
month, but that might give us a better reflection of the group's tastes.
You're not the first to consider seeding for this tournament, Diane.
For me, seeding in this context is rough ranking.
Strictly speaking, as I've said in an earlier post, if everyone ranked the 44
songs, there would be no need for any matchups and voting.
You doubt that anyone would want to bother ranking all 44 songs. Not
necessarily. What would you rather do, rank 44 mp3s in a folder (after
downloading from YT using a simple free app) in just one or two private sessions
OR have a duty to appraise and vote in 26 match-up contests every day over 2
The seeding idea has some merit. It's ranking done roughly. It would involve a
bit of time on each participants part, but not nearly as much time as
that needed for a detailed ranking. And here's another, related, good idea:
seeding could be optional amongst participants. I'm confident that Bruce and
Roger for starters could each come up with seedings (rough rankings) fairly
quickly - and these guys are in tune with what the majority of voters here like.
There is a downside to seeding from *one* perspective - most if not all 'white'
sounding music (even by black doo-wop groups) would soon be eliminated (cynical
perhaps, but true).
The way the tournament is currently being staged actually puts a lie to it being
only about discovering or re-discovering obscure artist-songs. It's too drawn
out over time for that to be true. Far more songs could be exposed and enjoyed
in a given time period if either:
1. all 44 songs were ranked in one go, or, more realistically
2. prelim rounds were eliminated by having 5 or 6 entries in round 1 matchups;
this would bring 26 mini contests down to 15