Singles League: Rules
Regular participants will spot that the structure and rules of this league have been changed for the 2019/20 season. Reasons for this are noted at the end of this page but first here is a summary of the revised format and rules.
- League matches are 4 bowl singles over 15 ends.
- Control of the mat for the first end will be decided by a coin toss.
- There will be 2 trial ends of 2 bowls each prior to the start of the match.
- There will be no dead ends - ejected jacks will be recentred 2m from the front ditch.
- The league will comprise a single division.
- Player ranking will be based on a points acquired as a result of matches played.
- 10 points will be awarded per completed match, distributed between the two players according to the final shot difference. If the match is drawn each player receives 5 points, in a match won by 1 or 2 shots the winner receives 6 pts while the loser receives 4 pts, for a winning margin of 3 or 4 shots the distribution is 7 and 3 pts, for 5 or 6 shots it is 8 and 2 pts, for 7 or 8 shots it is 9 and 1 pts, while a final score of 9 shots up or better sees the winner take all 10 points.
- Arrangement of matches should be by informal agreement between participants but the organizers reserve the right to establish a formal challenge procedure if this is deemed necessary.
- Only the most recent result between any two players will contribute to their points tally. There is no restriction on how many matches two participants may play but 10 points is all that will be shared between them based on the most recent matchup, no matter how many times they have played.
- At the end of a match the winner (or the player who won the coin toss in the case of a draw) should use the online 'Submit Match Result' form to notify the organisers of the winner, opponent, shots scored and date completed. Alternatively those details may be emailed or texted to the organisers. Standings will be updated after the results have been submitted.
Commentary on the 2019 Changes
A couple of aspects of the previous format were not liked by the organizers. One was that participants clearly ended up in either a positive or negative zone, notwithstanding the initial 200 point offset. Even a close loss would have harsh consequences and players anticipating losses might be reluctant to continue to participate fearing further reduction in their points tally. Indeed there was no points incentive in general to encourage participants to play more matches.
The new scoring system offers a more nuanced rating of match results and allows participants to build up points even from close losses. A slight drawback is that it will be possible, for example, for a player losing four matches to gain more points than one winning two matches but such quirks are arguably worth tolerating in a system that encourages more participation.