Please use this board to discuss Tournaments and Team Tournaments, ask questions and hopefully find the answers you are looking for. Personal attacks, arguing or baiting will not be tolerated on this board. If you have, or see a problem or something you are not happy about or think is wrong, please contact one of the above Moderators OR contact a Global Moderator HERE
KotDB: Generally said, when you play in an elimination tournament, you should play to win, not to draw. Yes, it requires a more risky way of playing but that's just an attribute of this system.
Fencer: In light of Andre Faria's comment, I think it would be better to use the value from the start of the game. Otherwise there may be a strong incentive for players to lose games.
Just thinking here. If the lower seated player is to advance in the case of a draw, what happens if Al & Bob are playing a tournament match and Al is higher at the start, but then Al loses a regular game to Carl and his rating goes down to below what Bob's is. Al's was higher at the start of the match, but Bob's was higher at the end. So who advances?
Sorry, I don't have a good solution to this, just thought it should be brought up.
I played last month such a tournament and indeed if a low rated player draws a higher rated player, then the latter on losts. In the first rounds the rating differences were big, but the semi-final was close. (I was knocked out in the quarter final)
Thad: This isn't a problem that only occurs at single elimination unless you play 2 game matches in a normal tournament. By the way, if a game is too unfair (which Chess is certainly not) I wouldn't play it ;-)
rabbitoid: That still leaves a problem in games line Pente where P1 enjoys a strong advantage. For average players, this doesn't really matter, but just as in Chess where strong play on both sides results in a draw, strong play by both sides will produce a win for P1.
Luke Skywalker:
I would expect only one, or possibly two if a single-elimination tournament can be defined with two games between each pair of opponents.
But I've observed that the number of slots they tell you to need often has little or nothing to do with the number of slots you actually need. Caveat emptor.
i believe it will be unwise to make single elimination tourney for games boards(chess or checkers) because the possibilities to have draws are high especially on the final rounds unless is used the bkr :)
Fencer: With single elimination, it is not possible to "draw" a game. But how about games that could not be won? For example a chess game with not enough material (K+N+N against K for example) or what about the fifty moves rule? Some time ago I had a game with three times the same position, but no automatic draw. Is this doable?
this tourney
http://brainking.com/en/Tournaments?trg=13412&trnst=0
has already started, but not enough people have singed up for some of the games. When the tourn was still in the "signed" state, it stated a deadline of 29 days until those would be deleted.
2 problems:
- the deadline is not stated now
- the tourn is not listed in the "signed" category anymore, so people probably won't find it and won't know that they still can sign up for it.
I agree with arpa, that's very "unpleasant"! This:
# The tournament will not be started until the first prize reaches at least a double of the entry fee. Players are informed about this status on the tournament page. #
means a prize tournament can't be started with less than 8 players.
Walter Montego: Simply said, when it's clear than one (and only one) player would have more points than anybody else, regardless of results of the unfinished games of the same section, he can be declared as the winner. In all other cases when S-B points could affect the final order, it's more complicated and it's safer to wait until everything is completed.
Fencer: I was thinking along the lines of having the program check the tournament after one person has finished all of the games. As you say, if that person has won all their games, they're the winner of the section. For all the other situations you could have a chart for each possibilty and have it check the chart. It might be easier to write a program to create the chart and then just use the chart as a table look up kind of thing. This seems like a lot of work to me and you'd need a different chart for each size section. Still, once there's a chart covering every way a section can be finished, it'd check it fast and wouldn't require any further calculations.
I'm thinking a brute force method might be the way to go even though it requires a calculation each time. There's not that many different ways a tournament can finish after one person has finished all of his games. You could just have it check to see if that person wins no matter what happens to the other people in the tournament. The moment it comes back with someone else the search is over until the next completed game and then check each person that has finished every game in the section.
If all that is too much trouble, it would still be a good thing just to have it cover some very special cases. The case with one person being done and having won every game. The cases where one person is done and only lost one game and everyone else has at least two losses or has lost to this person. Just adding this would probably cut down on a lot of idle tournaments, let alone if you covered every possibility.
I'm thinking the "two games colors switched with drawn games counting as a half point each" kind of tournament would take a different set up, or would it be the same thing?
(скрий) Ако посочите с мишката си иконата на играча с неговото членство, ще се появи подсказка с неговите/нейните по-важни детайли. (pauloaguia) (покажи всички подсказки)