Main Forum
| Post Reply
|
SWISS TOURNAMENTS - PLACINGS
|
|
Play pool tournaments online
|
| It's now: Apr 21, 10:34pm EST |
SWISS TOURNAMENTS - PLACINGS
Posted by
Scoboj03
(VIP) 22 Aug 2005 11:35am
HAVING SPOKEN TO A FEW PEOPLE REGARDING THIS I WOULD LIKE TO BRING TO THE ATTENTION OF GAME COLONY A LITTLE DISSAGREEMENT WITH THE WAY PLACINGS ARE MADE AT THE TOURNAMENTS FINISH.
IF AT THE END OF A SWISS TOURNAMENT MORE THAN 1 PERSON IS ON THE SAME POINTS IT SEEMS TO BE THAT THE HIGHEST RANKED PLAYER COMES FIRST.
THIS IS VERY UNFAIR ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU MAY HAVE BEATEN THAT PERSON EARLIER IN THE SAME TOURNAMENT
IS IT NOT POSSIBLE TO REVAMP THE WAY PLACINGS ARE MADE TO MAYBE A PLAY OFF OR TO A FAIRER SYSTEM ON THE LOWER RANKED PLAYER
IT JUST SEEMS UNFAIR THAT A PLAYER ON 1500 SHOULD BE PLACED LOWER THAT A PLAYER WHO STARTED THE TOURNAMENT ON A HIGHER RANKING.
I DONT WANT TO CAUSE A MAJOR HOOHAA OVER THIS BUT WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THE OPINIONS OF FELLOW TOURNAMENT PLAYERS
REGARDS
CELTICMAN
suggest swiss > 1pt matches
Posted by
webmaster
22 Aug 2005 12:07pm
Regarding placings in Swiss tourney, there are a couple of inconsistencies in the post by celticman.
Swiss tourney rules are listed as a link within any tourney & also at: http://www.gamecolony.com/swiss.html
Here's the relevant extract:
'...if the scores are equal, the winners are determined based on the players' 'Win Margin' -- by how many points they won over their rivals (totalled for all games). The Win Margin can be also negative if the player lost more points than he/she won. If both the scores and the Win Margin are the same, the winner is determined by rating. The Win Margin is recalculated by the system after each round & can be adjusted by a TD. Win Margin serves as a tie-breaker for players who otherwise got equal number of wins.'
In the case of the 1 pt swiss tourney, the win margin happens to be the same for all players 
A tie-breaker is still needed to determine the winners.
Let's suppose for a second that 3 players got the same number of points and PlayerA won against PlayerB and PlayerB won against PlayerC and PlayerC won against PlayerA
In the above (frequently happening) situation, the commonly accepted & fair thing to do in the swiss tourneys (although fairness differs in the eyes of different beholders!) is to look at the consistency of wins for each player and place the players accordingly. This happens to be the placing of players by rating.
To minimize the possibility of the above situation, I'd suggest to have swiss tourneys with matches greater than 1 pt. When this is in place, the win margin tie-breaker will kick in & replace (in most cases) the rating-based tie-breaker.
response...........
Posted by
flee1145
(VIP) 22 Aug 2005 12:50pm
Here's the relevant extract:
'...if the scores are equal, the winners are determined based on the players' 'Win Margin' -- by how many points they won over their rivals (totalled for all games). The Win Margin can be also negative if the player lost more points than he/she won. If both the scores and the Win Margin are the same, the winner is determined by rating. The Win Margin is recalculated by the system after each round & can be adjusted by a TD. Win Margin serves as a tie-breaker for players who otherwise got equal number of wins.'
LET'S GET SOMETHING THAT WE ALL CAN UNDERSTAND!
Is this that 'Mumbo-Jumbo' that so many are guilty of?!!?
If A beats B, and B beats C, and C beats A, then let their be a play-off! WHY should their previous 'points' have anything to do with an individual tournament?
flee1145
Regarding all the 'Mumbo-Jumbo'
Posted by
webmaster
22 Aug 2005 2:07pm
* Here's a more detailed explanation of WinMargin:
Suppose there are 2 rounds of 3pt matches & in the 1st Round PlayerA won with the score 3 & in second Round PlayerA won with the score 3:1
The total WinMargin for PlayerA is, therefore, 3+3=1=5
Let's imagine, now, that in the same 2 round tourney PlayerB also had 2 wins with scores 3:1 & 3:2 respectively. The WinMargin for PlayerB, then, would be: 3+3-1-2=3
Although both of the players would have the same number of wins, independent of ratings PlayerA would be placed above PlayerB due to a higher total WinMargin (5 versus 3)
Again, it goes without saying that WinMargin can be used effectively as a tie-breaker in tourneys with greater than 1pt matches.
* Regarding suggested play-offs versus tie-breakers
In the previous post I listed the situation where 3 players got the same # of points & their mixed wins over each other cannot determine the outcome: (A won against B, B won against C and C won against A)
It should not be hard to imagine that in the situation with playoffs, the similar outcome
can happen ad infinitum. Continued multiple play-offs, thus, can become a huge waste of time. Standard swiss tourneys, therefore, implement tie-breakers based (a) on WinMargin and (b) on Ratings
INCONSISTENCIES AND PLACINGS
Posted by
Scoboj03
(VIP) 22 Aug 2005 4:21pm
CAN YOU PLEASE TELL ME WHERE IM BEING INCONSISTANT?
IM ONLY TRYING TO POINT OUT THAT ITS NOT FAIR THAT SOMEBODY SHOULD WIN BECAUSE THEY HAVE A HIGHER RATING THAN THE PEOPLE THEY DREW ON POINTS WITH . THE RATING COMES B4 THE TOURNAMENT STARTS AND THEY ARE ONE OFF TOURNAMENTS SO WHY ARE THE RATINGS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.
LOW RATED PLAYERS GOING INTO A 10 MAN SWISS TOURNAMENT FOR EXAMPLE ,COULD WIN ALL THEIR GAMES AND COME 3RD OR 4TH IF THEY AVOID THE PLAYERS WHO FINISH ABOVE THEM AND WHO HAVE A HIGHER RATING , THUS GIVING THEM NO CHANCE BEFORE THE TOURNAMENT STARTS
IT MATTERS NOT TO ME WHAT WAY ITS DONE AS SOMEBODY HAS TO WIN , I JUST THINK ITS UNFAIR ON LOWER RATED PLAYERS
Swiss system & Fairness
Posted by
webmaster
22 Aug 2005 5:09pm
Rating should serve only as the last possible tie-breaker in a swiss tourney.
Swiss tourneys would benefit greatly if they become multi-point ones so that the primary tie-breaker and a (more fair) measure of player's performance would be their cumulative WinMargin
WinMargin can be used effectively as a tie-breaker in tourneys with greater than 1pt matches.
Rating is only a measure of how well the player did prior to the tourney.
Again, these types of tie-breakers are quite standard for swiss tourneys.
As to their fairness, we can draw a parallel with the often unfair capitalist society where ... a careful examination of its alternatives only reveals other (sometimes greater) unfairness.
Any set of rules can be branded as fair & unfair by different 'beholders'.
As opposed to a simplistic single elimination, a single loss in Swiss does not automatically lead to a loss in a tourney. Swiss can also be advantageous (more fair?) in byes.
In other words, there are advantages & disadvantages ( or certain elements of fairness & unfairness) with every tournament system.
In our view, fairness here is in knowing the rules, the possibilities, the alternatives & why's and wherefore's before entering the tournament & in sticking to the rules.
tournament placings
Posted by
Scoboj03
(VIP) 22 Aug 2005 5:35pm
i am sticking to the rules and always will , im just speaking up for people who in my opinion are being treated unfairly
im sorry if ive upset you
celticman
If I sounded testy, my sincere apologies...
Posted by
webmaster
22 Aug 2005 5:50pm
If I sounded testy, my sincere apologies...
The discussions on fairness & unfairness of various elements of standard tournament systems -- single elimination, double elimination, round-robin & swiss -- have been going on for at least twenty years.
Each of these tournament systems can boast their own flock of firm believers or detractors. Such is life...
More Details
Posted by
webmaster
27 Aug 2005 10:21am
To allow for better tie-breakers, future swiss tourneys will be for 2pt or more.If ratings will have to be used as final tie-breakers, these ratings will be measured at the end of the tourney.Ratings have a significant spread so it's unlikely to result in an extra tie.
If it is not numerically possible for some player to get a rating higher than an opponent during a tourney, then (in case of a tie) the competition for that player becomes equivalent to a single elimination tourney where all wins are required for the 1st place victory: if none of the leaders had a loss, a TD will add another round.
Reply to this topic
|
Play pool tournaments online
At GameColony.com you can play games of skill only -- play for free or play for $prizes!.
According to the statutes of most states in the United States, gambling is defined as: "risking something of value upon the outcome of a contest of chance". (Also see No Gambling!). The skill (as opposed to chance) is predominant in games of skill. Playing games of skill for $prizes, therefore, has nothing to do with gambling as it is not a contest of chance -- the more skillful player will win far more often. The chance element of a 'gamble' is either insignificant or missing. When players compete in tournaments or games of skill for $prizes -- it is "competitive entertainment" rather then "gambling". The more skilled winner will always win more matches, tournaments and $prizes.
|
|
