| |
BGonline.org Forums
Tournament brackets (long)
Posted By: Keene
Date: Monday, 13 October 2014, at 4:40 p.m.
Over the last few tournaments that I have attended, I have noticed an alarming problem with the brackets themselves, and where players losing in the main move to in the consolation etc. I also know that Rory had very specific opinions about it too.
I (and many others, I am sure) appreciate all the work that has been done in building these brackets, but to have situations arising where player 29 can play player 30 in the main event, and then meet them again 2 rounds later in the consolation is utterly ridiculous.
It is also utterly ridiculous that a player losing in the semi finals should drop back 3 rounds in the consolation. Should they not re-enter at either the semi final or quarter final round in the consolation - in the case of progressive consolation?
I know, its tough to make these brackets, but surely, we should have a solid and complete set of brackets for directors to use for 16, 20, 24, 32, 40, 48, 64, 72, 96, 128, 256 player fields for at least the following formats:
1. Single elimination, progressive consolation, progressive last chance & fresh draw last chance
2. Double elimination, progressive consolation, progressive last chance & fresh draw last chance
3. Triple elimination, progressive consolation, progressive last chance & fresh draw last chance - this is likely overkill, and will be deprioritized accordingly.
I also think that the 16, 32, 64, 128 & 256 player fields shouldnt be too hard technically speaking.
There should also be a defined process / action for field bracket management. For example, if a main event has between 25 and 32 players, then it should use the 32 player bracket according to design, with specific designations for where the bye's get inserted according to a specific schedule.
This shouldnt be hard to do.
As such, instead of complaining about it, and not actually doing anything, I would like to ask the community. Who will help me and work with me in this endeavor? Who will put their name down and get involved with the governance aspect of tournaments? Are you up to the challenge? Do you want to make a positive, proactive and meaningful contribution to tournament backgammon, not just here in the US, but the world over?
Also, finally, I listed 3 primary format cases, are there any others worth formalizing? I listed field sizes too - are these the most relevant?
We will not build it in a day, and rush it out for public consumption. However, it will be done, and it will be done well, with reasonable applications.
My primary objectives here:
1. Build tournament brackets that separate players who have already played each other so that they cannot meet again until at least a semi final stage (or whatever is reasonable).
2. Apply a formal set of guidelines for directors to use for specific field sizes under specific formats.
3. Provide PDF format documents containing these brackets that clearly define the movements, and can be freely printed and distributed.
I have not discussed this with anyone (directors or whatever), I have not asked opinions about doing it. I also freely welcome criticism and suggestions. I just want to give to the game. It has given me so much, I want to give back.
Butch & Mary Ann Meese: I know you built a strong set of brackets many years ago. I, and the community, thank you most heartily for these. I do not mean to offend, I just want to make small changes, and apply some governance to brackets at tournaments. I applaud and appreciate what you have done.
Keene Marin
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.