| |
BGonline.org Forums
Madison - Thank you..yes indeed :)
Posted By: Coolrey In Response To: Madison - Thank you..yes indeed :) (bob koca)
Date: Thursday, 4 September 2008, at 10:30 p.m.
No. I am a Rams fan!
Bob, in reading these messages I think I owe you an apology... Apparently you are an actual expert on the Swiss format, and I told Steve Brown, (while you were right behind me), what does he know???
Steve was worried about losing a spot in the finals and I was telling him to chill... It's always right to try and win the next match. I didn't want my calcutta partner stressing.
After going 9-0, Steve would have won a single elimination field of 512. Twice the size of Monte Carlo. Comparing the 9-0 to three 7-2's, or even the eventual winner's record of 10-2 to Steve's 9-1 it seems a shame and unfair to Steve...
...and while I am at it, Neil K, in 2004. Bill Davis was the only undefeated player in those 3 years who actually won his last match in the finals, realizing his "reward". The others had nightmares!
Time was of the essence and there was the usual Sunday jockeying as Steve and Neil were also alive in the masters, and maybe even Munitz. At some point, the tournament has to END...
As a player I would like to maximize MY chances of winning, so I can fully understand your point that you would have been upset if the flyer stated you could win until you lost 3 times, and you found yourself fighting for second place with an undefeated player winning outright.
Seems like the 2 loss players had, on average, about 18 or 19% chances of winning the tournament when the playoffs started. Under NO OTHER format can someone with as many as 2 losses win a tournament...
So, as reasonable people, it doesn't seem out of the question to award the undefeated player the "blue ribbon". He lost out on 50% equity when he lost to someone he probably already beat earlier in the event to become undefeated. Steve may have beaten every one of you to get there, I don't know.
You all would have "sacrificed" some equity and been unhappy, but not as much as Steve lost in the finals and he EARNED his equity by beating everyone he played. As a man I could live with sacrificing a little equity of my own to prevent a BAD beat on my brother, that seems honorable to me. He won 14 matches in a row at this tournament, yet he did not win an event. Perhaps that is too idealistic?
Everyone tried extremely hard to make it fair, but it looks like an undefeated player may actually be punished unmercifully by the single elimination playoff format, as Neil pointed out when I won in 2004 at INDY. So, I feel sorry for Steve, but not for Neil... Who beat me twice in a row in a NJ final when I rolled my match winning shots in the tray before hitting the board with my worst anti-joker possible. Memory is a funny thing, isn't it Neily?
The tournament has to end SOMETIME. No matter how this Swiss thing goes, someone seems to have a legitimate beef at the end of it. That is just too bad. I don't mean we need to abolish it or anything, just airing my feelings and ideas in the aftermath is all.
I made the conso playoffs only to find that an unequal number of players necessitated that two players play an extra match. It was determined by random draw that those two players were Munitz and I. (Sigh). We didn't try to organize a RR to equalize our equity... we just accepted our fate. At some point there have to be BYES in events.
It is FAIR first and FAST second to flip coins or roll dice or whatever. In the big picture you'll get your share of the byes, and if not today then tommorrow. All this other stuff is micro-management imho.
It was a fine event in any case, too bad Steve had to lose, and so did I. I'll get Tim next time, and maybe you too Mr. Kazaross!
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.