JellyBelly
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
|
 Posted:
Feb 09, 2017 - 13:48 |
 
|
Hi everyone! I'm thinking about starting a league and I'm looking at Swiss and Open Round Robin as perhaps interesting alternatives to the regular, scheduled Round Robin.
I'm just wondering if anyone has any experience of either of these being used successfully in FUMBBL leagues and, if so, what are the main pros and cons of each?
Thanks in advance  |
_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2
"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!"  |
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2017 - 14:07 |
|
It depends on your objectives. Most games played? Deadlines? Etc..
Combination? How do you handle those who stop playing?
What is important that you pitch that so coaches can apply accordingly. |
_________________
 |
|
JellyBelly
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2017 - 14:52 |
|
The objectives are fairly simple: I basically just want it to be a successful league where coaches are playing games and having fun. It will be US time zone, so I'm probably going to have a situation where the player pool isn't very big and spread fairly thin across 3-4 time zones.
I was initially thinking of going with a standard RR, seasonal promotion/relegation, but Open Round Robin might be an interesting alternative - perhaps I could set up something a bit like the old Faction division, where coaches can play whoever they want, in any order, and X games will count for the season score. But, I don't have any experience of it in practice and maybe it would be too casual and there wouldn't be that drive to get your games played that you have with a scheduled RR?
Really, I'm just hoping to hear about what people's experiences have been with these systems, as they seem less widely-used (although, perhaps I'm mistaken?). |
_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2
"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!" |
|
xnoelx
Joined: Jun 05, 2012
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2017 - 15:01 |
|
The main user of ORR is probably the 145 Club (though the OLC also used them in the past, not sure if they still do). I think it works well there as some newer players may not yet want the commitment of a weekly schedule, and it also allows those who want to play a lot to do so.
One of the drawbacks of an ORR though is that it allows those who want to play a lot to do so. This means you can get one team who plays much more often everyone else and quickly ramps up their TV, giving them an advantage over their later opponents. And the team that plays the most games is likely to win.
And the main place you see Swiss here is in tournaments. The later rounds of majors use them sometimes, and the online NAF tournaments are all Swiss, I believe. Though they're also non-progression, which makes the comparison a bit less relevant. |
_________________
 Nerf Ball 2014 |
|
JellyBelly
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2017 - 15:18 |
|
Thanks for your comments, xnoelx. It sounds like ORR might be more prone to becoming unbalanced and possibly dominated by 2-3 particularly keen players, which might then put off others.
I was thinking that Swiss might be an alternative to scheduled RR for situations where you've got, let's say, 13 teams, but you want an 8-round season as opposed to 12 rounds. That way, the Swiss algorithm would pick the matchups, rather than doing a RR and forfeiting some games manually. We've had some discussion about that in the NWL and some didn't think it would be a good idea.
So, it sounds like there aren't many regional leagues on FUMBBL that use Swiss or ORR? I guess there is probably a reason why everyone uses a regular RR  |
_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2
"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!" |
|
Throweck
Joined: Feb 23, 2013
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2017 - 15:37 |
|
| xnoelx wrote: | The main user of ORR is probably the 145 Club (though the OLC also used them in the past, not sure if they still do). I think it works well there as some newer players may not yet want the commitment of a weekly schedule, and it also allows those who want to play a lot to do so.
One of the drawbacks of an ORR though is that it allows those who want to play a lot to do so. This means you can get one team who plays much more often everyone else and quickly ramps up their TV, giving them an advantage over their later opponents. And the team that plays the most games is likely to win.
And the main place you see Swiss here is in tournaments. The later rounds of majors use them sometimes, and the online NAF tournaments are all Swiss, I believe. Though they're also non-progression, which makes the comparison a bit less relevant. |
This is a good summary and saves me writing anything. Thanks! |
_________________
FUMBBL Podcast Donate to the FUMBBL Podcast! |
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2017 - 15:49 |
|
Consider open round robin, allowing multiple teams for those who want to play most, and limit the maximum number of games per team at a reasonably low level, lets say around 5. (Plus only the best team counts for playoff.)
That way no team will run away with too many skills for next possible season. |
_________________
|
|
JellyBelly
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2017 - 16:03 |
|
@bghandras: That sounds like an interesting suggestion. For an ORR, is it possible to limit the number of games each team can play per season in the league setup, or are they by default allowed to play every other team once, so any game number limit would have to be policed by the commish? |
_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2
"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!" |
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2017 - 16:16 |
|
There is no automated limit in ORR. You should cover by league rules, and enforce manually. |
_________________
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2017 - 16:41 |
|
If open RR is too "competitive" it can get picky and acrimonious. If I only have to play 10 games why should I play the 10 best teams when I could play the 10 worst? Why should I play bashers if I can play wussers. 
It tends to suit friendly, laid back coaches better. Get rid of the overly competitive ones before they poison it. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
CaptainKrunch
Joined: Nov 06, 2010
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2017 - 17:01 |
|
Open round robin as its been referred to should really be called open swiss since it doesn't require you to play every opponent. True ORR would have each player playing every other, just being able to decide the order among themselves. It really all comes down to what issues you want to have to deal with as commish. Do you want to have to decide what to do with players who don't meet the game minimum or who don't play every opponent in true ORR? Do you want to have to deal with players complaining that the guy who went 10-0 played the weakest opponents possible and matches should be weighted, and then have the guy who goes 10-0 complain when weighted matches puts him behind players who went 6-4? Do you want to have to do the math involved in weighted matches? Do you want to have to keep track matches happening on a schedule you didn't make? If that doesn't sound all that bad to you, by all means go for an open format.
I personally prefer scheduled format, because the biggest issue there is really just people not playing matches or dropping completely, which in the end really just means free wins for the other players. Everybody likes free wins.
As to Robin vs Swiss, I would personally only use Swiss if there were too many entrants to make round robin impractical, or to purposefully reduce the length of the season. If you get 8 or fewer players to start, that means 7 games played if everybody only plays each other once, plus any end of season tournament you decide to implement, if any. So 2-3 months depending on if you have a knockout at the end.
I've never implemented this, but I personally like the idea of doing something like the FA cup where the KO tournament happens at the same time as the regular season based on last seasons rankings. Would shorten the length of seasons considerably, plus would mean more games in a week. Could even go across tiers like the FA cup if you manage to get enough participants going.
Which is one of the questions you have to ask yourself about fixed leagues. If participation increases, do you go swiss, or do you make a tiered league system like soccer (which is short for "association football" like rugger is short for "rugby football before you Brits jump all over me). I like a tiered system. Lets new players come in and start low playing against new players, and gives weaker players opportunities to win trophies at a lower level, when they might have otherwise just dropped out if the competition was too intense.
That's all I got, I think. More than happy to help in any way though, being in the US time zone and looking for a league myself. Just shoot me a PM or something. |
|
|
m0gw41
Joined: Jun 12, 2012
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2017 - 17:46 |
|
The fairest is RR, the quickest is Swiss, the easiest is ORR.
I don't like ORR, doesn't work as a format for me beyond just keeping games between a few teams: keep cherry picking in ranked! |
_________________
 |
|
JellyBelly
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2017 - 20:51 |
|
Thanks for the advice! I'm kind of going off the idea of the Open Round Robin. Seems like it would probably be unbalancing and encourage picking too much. I'll probably just go with the standard scheduled RR then.
American-timezone coaches who are looking for a cool new league to join - watch this space! |
_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2
"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!" |
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
