Retep: It was just an example. Nobody says the prize must be always only 25%. The tournament I've just created has 40% prize for the winner.

Doesn't matter.

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.

Fencer: 1) tomorrow? i don't know this! wonderful!

2) oops ... i change that word in "unpleasant" ok?

arpa: Why don't you wait for tomorrow? The S-B is already fixed, it just needs to be uploaded.
Btw, I don't like the word "stealing".

see Help page

8.6.2) Prize tournaments with an entry fee

instead of .... The tournament will not be started until the first prize reaches at least a double of the entry fee.

8 players it's the same.

same page ....The tournament is defined with these prizes: 25% to the winner, 10% to the second place and 5% to the third place....

I think 60% "loss" is an stealing ... 20% are reasonable (50% 20% 10%).

NECESSARY REWIEW S-B CALCULATION (today are incorrect)!!! see(for example):

http://senseis.xmp.net/?SonnebornBerger

arpa: Huh?

at Dark Battleboats in the tourney Scarlets Springtime Follies".

Sider line 4 first 8 to sign, two games each, under 2000 rating.


http://brainking.com/en/Tournaments?trg=13388&tri=83887&trnst=0

Walter Montego: I am not working on it. But I plan to do so.

Fencer: This will be a very good improvement. I'm glad you're working on it. Good luck.

Congrats to CameronsDad for winning Speed Gammon #2's Backgammon Race!

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?

Walter Montego: It's easy to cover simple situations where one players wins all games in his sections - then nobody else can be the section winner. In other cases it can be a little more complicated, as you say, many "if this, than that". It's not the biggest priority to implement it now but I will think about it.

Fencer: You'll have to have it either end the tournament or if there's more than one section, advance the winners to the next round if the other sections are waiting. The players whose games don't affect the winners of a section can continue to play their game, but everyone still in the tournament can get playing again. Or the tournament winner is now known and those slower players can finish their game. I'm sure Pawn and Knight members will like this improvement too. They'll be free to play in another tournament while the slowpokes can play their game in peace.

It sounds like a lot of "if this, then that" kind of programming. You'll have to take into account a lot of different scenarios to insure getting every situation covered. I'm sure there's a finite amount of ways a section can be completed. Or would a brute force method work and you just plug every win or loss possible and check the value for each after each game is completed? If it comes out the same for all situations it'd be time to advance or announce winners, right?

gringo: Because the current system is working like that. The new one might have a more sophisticated algorithm.

gringo: i agree with gringo :) many tourneis should be stopped and maybe games not considered but this could be only when there is only 1 organizer of tourney ib believe :)

Fencer: Fencer, one question: why do tournaments still wait for the very last game to be ended even if the two players don't have a chance to succeed?

francescolr: Single elimination will be added in February, double elimination sometimes later.

Fencer: another thing is that this will remand to that tourney u were talking about : kind of single elimination(that is why 2 pple per section ) or (as used in other sites) a kind of double elimination ( lets say i play 1 game with you and another vs someone else and i lost both games i am out of tourney) what u think ? :)

francescolr: I mean this kind of a tournament is not programmed yet, that's why such tournament cannot be created now. But I plan to implement it.

Fencer: what u mean ? and 1 more thing : wich native pple for translation are u looking for ?

francescolr: It must be implemented first, of course.

Fencer: how i do that then ? and it is also possible to do 2 players per section ?

francescolr: Yes, it could be done.

i have question : it is possible to create a tourney with different kind of games for the same tourney ? (exemple i wanna do a tourney where each player must play 2 games of hypergammon 2 games of battleboats and 2 games of go mokuand combine the points ) ?

Here is a last minute tournament starting tomorrow in the evening for those who love to connect 4 stones :)

ScarletRose: Thanks!!

She is the winner of my Backgammon "Scarlets Springtime Follies".

Congratulations on games well played.

Hi Gammon Lover Friends,

Wouldn't be well to prepare some gammon tourneys for the BKR rated faster players? Wouldn't be well to see the best players of 10% ?

The 10% is, counts of 1/10 any type Gammon Games. For example, Brainking has today 934 players for Backgammon. 1/10 is 94 players, from first to 94. rated players, everyone has right to join to all type Gammon Games!

I prepared so Invitational Tournament for the beginning, for all type Gammon Games.

I invited to this tournament, all inside of top 10% of the any type Gammon players (Back, Nack, Crowded, Race, Hyper, Anti) who have established BKRs.

We don't wish the games in the tournament without end and preferred Fischer Clock!!!

Match type: 3 points match with doubling cube
Tournament type: one game for each two players
Maximum number of players per section: 8
Final match type for two player section: 3 points match with doubling cube
Time control: Time: 1 day, Bonus: 3 hours, Limit: 10 days, no days off (red signed)

Don't be afraid of Fischer Clock!

(That means after beginning you have 1 day (24 hours) for your first move. Per your another move, you'll have 3 hours bonus for your other move time. 10 days is limit time for the opponents.) Read more at: http://brainking.com/en/FAQ?ht=24

If you think that you are inside the 10% of rated players any one of Gammon Games and did not get any invite from me, please write me if you wish to join the tournament, I send your invite. Dead time for joining requests is: 2 hours before the tournament starts!

With your join to this tourney, hope to play good matches and enjoy!

Thank you!

SPRINT in the Rain! #2

Run? This is a SPRINT !!!! 10 hour Rain Pond

Eriisa: Dangerous? I give up before I start! She's a lovely person and a super backgammon player. I'll get her back one day!

Doris: I always said Ms Delte was a dangerous person to play against!

Congrats Ms Delete!!!!

Ms Delete on winning Backgammon & Hyper 2100+ First 8 (Hyper Backgammon Well Done

Anyone interest?



http://brainking.com/it/Tournaments?trg=13262&u=7859&trnst=0
http://brainking.com/it/Tournaments?trg=13008&u=7859&trnst=0
http://brainking.com/it/Tournaments?trg=13263&u=7859&trnst=0
http://brainking.com/it/Tournaments?trg=13333&u=7859&trnst=0

In my recent Tourney Scarlet Spring Follies.. :)

Thanks for your participation

http://brainking.com/en/Tournaments?trg=13290&trnst=0

new JT I.

Thad: Well I do not think we need to calcuate how many gammon cubed tournaments there are, but since what I have seen is that gammon tournaments with a cube are less popular then lets say a gammon tournament without the cube, I would think that a majority of cubed gammon tournaments only have 1 section. (under 8 players)

Not saying that makes it any less important of an issue since even if a few tournaments are calulated wrong and someone is unable to move to the next round in a tournament is too many in my opinion.

BIG BAD WOLF: Is it probable that there are multiple rounds in most tournaments? I would say that there are probably are, or maybe not. Let's multiply some numbers together and calculate the probability.

fungame: I did not think about it as being a first round of multiply rounds, so you are correct - that would be a problem.

For anyone who enjoys a face paced tourney.. Please.. I wish to offer it to those who will play continuously.. not just one turn a day ..

°°·.,,.·°¤`'¤¸`°´`°«*Scarlets Springtime Follies*»¸.¤°´`°'¤¸¤´¤°·.,,.·°°

nobody25 for winning my hyper backgammon tourney

BIG BAD WOLF: well, but when next round starts and different players advance than using normal rules, I am really wondering how can this be fixed later...

gringo: Well when new things are programmed (tournaments with cube), sometimes things like this happens.

Normally what Fencer does is when he does fix something like this, he will go back and "fix" all past tournaments so I'm sure that it will be fixed sooner or later - probable just not a top priority.

BIG BAD WOLF: anyway, this is awful and shouldn't happen.

arpa: Yea, it was pointed out awhile back that tournaments which use the cube are not caluclated corretly - I think I posted on this board what I found out.

I'm not sure if anyone had told Fencer, or posted it in the Bug tracker yet. But I think Fencer is planning a big update to the tournament code, so he may just be waiting until that happens to fix it all at that time.