You’d be hard-pressed to find a kubb player who hasn’t encountered the Klassic system in tournament play. With a few notable exceptions (National Championship, Loppet, Dallas), it’s the go-to way to create matchups at U.S. kubb tournaments. But Kettle Moraine Kubb thinks it can be improved upon.
The Kubb Count Scoring System is the brainchild of Steve McDiarmid and was first debuted at the 2023 Kubbapalooza: Ice Games. The biggest change from the “traditional” Klassic system, is scoring. Instead of 1 point for a win, half a point for a tie, and .33/.66 point for trailing/leading, there are points for each baseline kubb that is knocked down, and an additional point for a win.
Seemed like there should be a way to better reflect the level of play, the level of skill in each game. I think the “DNF leading/trailing” jargon made me think, “Just tell me how many Kubbs each team got down!”
Steve McDiarmid
This means you could encounter scores of 6-5, 5-2, 0-0, and anything in between. There’s no longer a need to report a “leading” or “trailing” game, but instead a simple “2-4” could be reported. This system will better indicate how a match went as well.
Now that 10-in-play match between two really good teams is reported as 6-5 instead of one team as a winner (1 point) and the other the loser (0 points). More of what actually happened in the match is reported, and that helps set the upcoming matches.
In theory, the extra points should help match up similar-skilled teams, a stated goal of the Klassic system. So how does it stack up against traditional Klassic scoring? During the ice games, McDiarmid kept score both ways to compare the systems. These are the results after six rounds of qualifying:
Kubb Count Scoring
- Kraken Kubbs
- Glori Holtz
- Ragnarok
- Pour Decisions
- Stay Cold, My Friends
- Something Clever
- Yurt Killing Me, Smalls
- Politikubbs
- Cramping Tiger/Frozen Everything
- EvenKubb
- SISU
- Kubbie Brothers
- Iceberg Steelers
- No Headlights
- Drunk & Disorderly
- KubbBoom!
Klassic System Scoring
- Ragnorok
- Glori Holtz
- Kraken Kubbs
- Stay Cold, My Friends
- Pour Decisions
- Yurt Killing Me, Smalls
- EvenKubb
- Politikubbs
- Something Clever
- No Headlights
- Cramping Tiger/Frozen Everything
- KubbBoom!
- SISU
- Kubbie Brothers
- Drunk & Disorderly
- Iceberg Steelers
As you can see, there were a few notable changes. The Kubb Count Scoring System helped Kraken Kubb rise to the top of the rankings, jumping two spots from what would be their placement in the standard Klassic system. A few other teams jumped one to three spots as well. It’s worth noting that a top-eight championship bracket would still see most of the same teams—in this case only Something Clever and EvenKubb were affected. The big difference is in the seeding.
So what do you think? Is the Kubb Count Format the next great innovation in kubb? Is it too complicated to get adopted? Let us know your thoughts in the comments section.
3 Comments
I would like the new reporting requirements which need to be captured by each team, verified by each team and new documentation requirements for the tournament director to be more fully discussed in this article.
Appears to be lots of numbers and forms to be populated and validated. As kubb tournament sizes gets larger there may be additional time requirements for this game documentation, team validation and entry into a system.
Another topic not discussed here is how a tournament director addresses the end of a kubb game can directly increase or decrease the Did Not Finish (DNF) scenarios.
Maybe a bigger question is, are there existing solutions to reduce or eliminate the DNF trailing/leading system? I think there are some solutions available to tournament directors.
One way to reduce DNFs is enacting an accelerated kubb removal process once a time limit has been reached. This will remove the kubb that is farthest from the center line and would result in a win or loss in an accelerated manner, potentially eliminating all DNFs.
Another way to reduce DNFs is to extent the game by adding a finishing round or multiple rounds.
Or there can be a combination of extending rounds and accelerated kubb removal.
If the data on how a tournament director handles end of game scenarios is historically available, this data should be captured along with the DNF counts so that analyzation and interpretation can be made.
Over time the best solutions will rise to the top if we are measuring that which is measurable and sharing that data with the kubb community.
Pingback: Andy’s New Age Kubb: Thinking Outside the Box | Kubb On
Pingback: Michigan Kubb Championship 2023 Recap | Kubb On