hmm evo 2k5… it was already done there in pool play. they were all round robin, and it took forever.
no matter how you look at it, round robin takes a longer time. everyone would LOVE to do round robin, but you usually end up needing more stations to run groups faster or some other bs.
theres a reason why NO ONE in the world uses round robin format in big tournaments. its just too long. no matter how you put it.
its major plus is that rr accurately tells who the best, and who the worst is in the tourney. while double elim only gauges top 2. we all want rr, but in large tourneys, it just doesnt work
I’ll do my best to prove you wrong.
Not really, because I can’t fathom how you could possibly have all that experience and still not understand why double elimination is the most sensible choice for tourney play.
Just seems to me you gain very little benefit by using double elimination. If you want players to have extra matches, theres faster formats available which give players even more matches.
Back then (over 10 years ago) I ran fighting game tournaments upstate.
Currently I run handball tournaments, but the same processes can be applied.
When you have a small crowd or group of people that stays together round robin is great.
People prefer getting to play against more different people.
When you have a large crowd, the switch time (time for 2 players to finish then next 2 to get on) adds up, and things get delayed. Also, people want a small break after they play, you can’t expect everyone to stick around the whole time. Also, it’s difficult to find people in a large crowd.
edit:
spelilgn
a swiss system tournament sounds kinda cool
unfortunately, it would still take longer than double elim due to losers still playing. would be interesting to try for say, 4 sets, then anyone with 3 points is sent to losers bracket and anyone with 4 is sent to winners bracket in a new double elim bracket. it would take more time but it would at least gauge the top 8/16/whatever a bit better.
I’ll admit I haven’t read the whole thread, but if R3ko has demonstrated that Round Robin has fewer total matches than double elim, how could it take more time? Or is it just the case that sometimes RR is fewer total matches?
playing a gazillion matches in a tournament = overrated.
Because he’s taking a lot of liberties with his tournaments such as making parts of his tournament one game, or putting the winners into a single elim bracket, but only comparing to a full double elim 2/3 bracket.
Even so, 6 of the 9 examples STILL have double or more matches. Matches are way more time consuming than games, since they require changing out people, so i don’t see how this is better.
Of the 3 remaining examples:
Each pool is 6 matches (A vs BCD, B vs CD, C vs D), 16 pools = 96 matches
32 man double elim = 63 matches + grand finals
63+96 = 159 matches, not 126
Even more matches are added as the tournament gets bigger.
96 matches for pools
16 winners + 16 losers = about 45 matches
total = 141 matches, again for only 64 people, imagine 256!
Single Elim for final 32? not happening, also it would be 96 + 30 = 126, same as double elim.
Only 2 scenarios are even possible (even though they both need more matches than double elim). When you factor in the intangibles, like the time that you have to allocate for all the pool members to get together (even with a zero tolerance policy, players still need time to at least walk across the ballroom) The time to remake the finals bracket, etc… it’s not the same at all.
The extra match is a second chance, that assures that **SKILLED PLAYERS **don’t end up at incorrect placings given their actual skill due to the randomness of certain games, poorly setup brackets, etc.
Two chances is sufficient for this, also the extra matches in a round robin don’t serve as another chance its just more time to play the game. If two people’s tournament fates have been decided and they still have to play each other the match has no meaning other than, giving a person who is already out one more game or somone who has already advanced little more practice time.
The math doesn’t always work out as well in real life.
The shortest route between two points on a map is a straight line, but try walking that line in real life and see if you don’t run into a building, a fence or a big ass brick wall. Math is all good but sometimes you have to factor in reality too.
What hes saying is true as long as the tournament is conducted with robots and not humans. But as soon as you stick humans into the equation the time shoots up significantly.
i’m glad people pwned the fuck out of this thread. I hate reko’s ideas.
single elimination after you already seeded out the weaker players is flat out stupid. People want to see the big dogs duke it out more than one game.
Thanks for pointing out my mistake there, like I said my maths isn’t as good as it once was.
Seems like your blowing everything out of proportion though, I don’t understand why people would not want to hang around and play in groups? There honestly arent that many games and it doesn’t take that long. Why do people go to great lengths to travel and pay to enter tournaments if they don’t want to be around when they happen?
But if Double elim is only accurate for the top 2, then theres still lots of incorrect placings no?
Matches still have meaning even if they have no affect in the group, not for the tournament but for the players. Gives them more tournament experience, and gives them better value for money.
Trust me you don’t need robots to make round robin work, its a pretty easy system employed all round the world.
Why are you so angry? if your upset this much maybe you shouldn’t read my threads at all.
Also many tournaments employ single elimination after groups, ever heard of the world cup, biggest sporting event in the world alongside the olympics?
In Japan they don’t even have groups, just sinlge elimination straight away, I bet that really grinds your gears.
I could give 2 shits about the world cup.
yes in japan they do that but this we’re talking about an american tournament. Different rules, different country. Why would a countries different rules grind my gears? I could careless.
If japan likes to see their players go out in 1 go, hey thats what they like but its not like that in america. Speaking as an american, I want to see top players lose a game, then readjust and get back in it.
Instead of trying to post so much crap, go back to elementary school and relearn basic addition.
And you should learn geography. He’s in the UK, not America.
Someones got a chip on their shoulder it looks like, why not actually try debating, instead of just trying to insult me.
As soon as someone has to insult someone else in a debate, they have already lost.
And you should learn that America is rightfully the default country in everybody’s mind. America kicks ass, and any conversation in which the country of discussion is not specified should automatically be assumed to be about America. Purple mountains and fruited plains and shit. Fuck yeah.
Anyway, not to bust out the faulty argument that anything that has stood the test of time is automatically right, but we’ve had several chances to try other formats. They worked okay, but double elimination just holds up the best in a clutch. Single elimination is too subject to randomness, and round robin is a pain in the ass to deal with for tourney organizers when the shit hits the fan. DE is a sensible system.
And I am, if nothing else, a sensible man.
Since you have run tournaments before but you didn’t factor in multiple tournaments happening at the same time I will assume for this post that all of the tournaments you ran were individual tournaments.
-
Pretty much since NEC began (2001) when we used to get blasted here in philly, from all over the country, for running tournaments with 10-15 games at a time The tournament scene in the US has been adding more and more games to its major events.
-
There is a Phenomenon that occurs at most multi event tournaments where there are players who play numerous games extremely well and end up in the final/ semi of multiple games every time. These players slow up double elimination severly but at least most of this backup occurs at the end of the tournaments. In a round robin format each seperate pool provides a new opportunity for the backup. If somone is winning in game A and therefore keeps playing new opponents as stated in your setup and they are also up in game B or C or D, Then Pool Play in Game B is stuck waiting for that person to lose or play all of their games through, also if that player does lose and goes to game B Game A is now stuck in the same position. The more games you add the more often this situation will happen.
Every event I’ve helped to run never has multiple tournaments running at the same time, we always do one after the after as we know people will want to play in multiple games, so we avoid the conflicts all together, so thats probably why i overlooked that.
Go players use this with teams. If you have enough consoles/cabs (which is a lot) a swiss tournament would be great. Everybody plays a lot, winner takes it all. 2p teams could do the sbo play-up and 3p teams could play all 1vs1 in parallel and then just count the points for each match