A few comments/corrections
Posted By: neilkaz In Response To: Less Swiss Please--An appeal to tournament directors (AdamStocks)
Date: Friday, 28 March 2014, at 3:39 p.m.
In Response To: Less Swiss Please--An appeal to tournament directors (AdamStocks)
1. Everyone knows they will get to play a given number of matches before being knocked out
Once you have lost a couple of matches, the rest are dead. I don't want to waste time playing dead matches.
(NK) Adam, I'm not sure that you fully understand the format. The format is not full Swiss but Swiss elimination. When you've lost you're 4th match you can no longer win a prize and therefore are out of the event and aren't playing dead matches.
2. Everyone can lose a match or two and still be in the hunt, so we are not victim to one or two unlucky matches to ruin the entire weekend;
That's a bit of a red herring because to win a Swiss you generally have to have only one loss maximum, so a loss is pretty devastating anyway.
(NK) In More Swiss, I was the driving force behind developing the format and I pushed for it for nearly a decade and now Rory and Jeb are doing it, you can win the event with two losses. With 3 losses you can't win 1st place but still can win a prize.
3. With clocks employed, we know exactly when every round starts. Scheduling is a dream. And if I finish a match early I can go enjoy a nap, drink food etc. and know exactly when my next match starts.
TD's can and should schedule the format such that it runs nicely on time in the first place.
(NK) What I think you're proposing is a conventional typical elimination format but with sked. start times for each round rather than having players waiting around for an undetermined time for their next rd. opp to finish. This is to be considered and especially for an event that has a day or two more than the typical extremely hurried weekend ABT event. (Note that it basically is impossible to squeeze a More Swiss into a normal weekend and an extra day is needed).
4. The format of continuing to match the winners with the winner and losers with the losers is ultimately the most fair competition, negating the horrible advantages and disadvantages created by the typical random draw.
Random opponents is more realistic - using a winners v winners and losers v losers system helps the weaker players too much.
(NK) Here we are in agreement! I much prefer something like the FT system where in the Swiss a computer makes the random draw for those remaining in the event. Far too much time and effort from directors is expended trying to pair those with like records. At the very least, the first 4 rds of any quadrupal elimination Swiss event should be randomly drawn (of course ensuring that no one plays anyone twice or gets two byes) and it is trivial for a computer to do so.
Messages In This Thread
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.