New standard method for resolving 3-way ties on the ABT
Posted By: Sean Garber In Response To: New standard method for resolving 3-way ties on the ABT (TarHeelFan)
Date: Monday, 2 July 2018, at 7:38 p.m.
In Response To: New standard method for resolving 3-way ties on the ABT (TarHeelFan)
At last year's San Jose tournament, the final 3 were Jeremy Bagai, Al Hodis, and Ed O'Laughlin with 8-2 records. Ed was Player "C", playing a 7-3 player in round 11. At that time, Jeremy and Al each had $2485.875 worth of equity, 15.6% more than Ed ($2150.75). I would call that at least significant.
"Player C in your example cannot finish worse the T2." Absolutely true, but if Player "C" loses in round 11, there is a bigger tie for 2nd and the second place money will be spread out more.
I still have no problem calling the Player "A" and Player "B" spots half byes.
Rule change proposal for Swiss System tournaments: When the tournament has exactly 3 players with 2 loses after a round and one of those 3 players already has a bye, that player should automatically be assigned the Player "C" spot in the following round. This should be given even higher priority than the "No immediate repeat match" rule.
I know that we would need an odd number of players and a player getting a bye in the first 3 rounds making it to the final 3 for this to have any impact.
for those with Facebook
Messages In This Thread
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.