zakatan
Joined: May 17, 2008
|
 Posted:
Feb 28, 2014 - 12:02 |
 
|
There is this one tournament format which allow teams to play at least 2 games in spite of being single game KO format.
It starts as a normal KO tournament, and the losers of the first round start a second tournament. Each round of the main tournament, the losers move to the corresponding round in the losers bracket. In the end, the winner of the losers tournament plays against the winner of the winners.
I don't know if there is interest in this kind of format, but I for one would love to see it as an option in fumbbl. |
_________________
 |
|
Roland
Joined: May 12, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 28, 2014 - 12:15 |
|
+1
I'll have to do this manually... |
|
|
Christer
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
It has been brought up a couple of times in the past by various people. I even spent a tiny bit of time trying to figure out a way to automate the schedule in a reasonable way at one point. It's fairly tricky to map the format into the data model FUMBBL uses for tournaments.
Essentially, each match in a tournament has two primary attribues that describe where in the schedule the match is. These values are "round" and "position", and they're not always used (depending on the format). As an example, a straight KO tournament is represented primarily using the "position" attribute where the final game is position 1, the two semi finals are positions 2 and 3 and so on. Effectively, it's equivalent to a method used to represent a binary tree in an array from a computer science perspective. The way it's set up means that if a match is played in position X, the winner will be moved to position X/2 (rounded down) and whether or not X is even (ie, X%2 == 0) indicates whether the winning team will be the home or away team in the upcoming match. The round attribute is also used, but not strictly necessary for scheduling (primarily used for calculating winnings).
Now, double elimination makes things significantly more complex, where you need to not only keep track of two of these binary trees at once (which now that I am writing this stuff down realize could be represented by allowing negative position values) but you also need to be able to handle the transitions from the winners' bracket to the losers' bracket. It's not immediately obvious to me how they relate. There's also the special case with what to do with the last few games where a double elimination system will sometimes require a repeat match between the top teams (ie, if the team in the losers' bracket wins the match against the team that hasn't lost yet).
While nothing of this is impossible to implement, it's certainly less than trivial to figure out. It's on my fairly extensive TODO list, but for now I'm focusing all my development time on league changes (custom rosters to begin with). |
|
|
zakatan
Joined: May 17, 2008
|
| Posted:
Feb 28, 2014 - 13:07 |
|
Thanks for the explaination Christer!
Looks more complicated than it seems at first sight, and as much as i'd love to see the double elimination, there's a bunch of other things i'd love to see first  (custom rosters being one of them). |
_________________
|
|
Roland
Joined: May 12, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 28, 2014 - 13:19 |
|
| Christer wrote: | | ...but for now I'm focusing all my development time on league changes (custom rosters to begin with). |
 Tell. Us. More.
|
|
|
sonrises
Joined: May 02, 2013
|
| Posted:
Feb 28, 2014 - 13:22 |
|
Custom rosters!!!  |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 28, 2014 - 13:52 |
|
|
Sutherlands
Joined: Aug 01, 2009
|
| Posted:
Feb 28, 2014 - 15:54 |
|
Christer, going on what you said about negative values...
The winner traverses just like a single elimination tournament, going to value/2, and the loser goes to the other bracket in the negatives at -(value/2). Obviously the loser of a losing bracket match would instead be eliminated. Then at the end, -1 and 1 play each other, and if the person in the winner's bracket loses they play again. |
|
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Feb 28, 2014 - 16:02 |
|
Often, the last round or two or whatever is presented as single-elimination. That would solve the "double header" problem. |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
the_Sage
Joined: Jan 13, 2011
|
| Posted:
Feb 28, 2014 - 17:04 |
|
Zakatan, could you please rename this thread to "Custom rosters!" =D
(all kidding aside, it does sound like a fun format) |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 28, 2014 - 17:23 |
|
| JackassRampant wrote: | | Often, the last round or two or whatever is presented as single-elimination. That would solve the "double header" problem. |
Do you mean that the losers bracket can never do better than 3rd/bronze?
I don't think that would be worth the effort of creating on Fumbbl. I think that too many coaches just wouldn't play their second chance matches unless they have a chance at 1st/gold.
If the loser's champion gets to play the winner's champion and wins then they have to play again.
This format is great if you have to travel a long distance to compete. If you are playing from your own home it's a 'nice to have' but not much more than that. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - 19th June! ---- All Star Bowl XII - Teams of Stars - Sign up NOW! |
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 28, 2014 - 18:16 |
|
| koadah wrote: | | sonrises wrote: | | Custom rosters!!! |
Ooooh! They're gonna be dancing in the streets. |
Tomb King Settra sits straight up in his golden throne and a evil grin comes across his face.
"Rah-Ma custom rosters!!!
One week of celebration in all the land for this grand event that is almost upon us."
The KPL shuts down in celebration for a day and then the killing resumes.
Which brings up an interesting question.
Are they more excited about the custom rosters?
Are they more excited about the Killing?
Or is it possible they are more excited about the prospect of killing with custom rosters? |
_________________
Comish of the:  |
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Feb 28, 2014 - 18:30 |
|
| koadah wrote: | | JackassRampant wrote: | | Often, the last round or two or whatever is presented as single-elimination. That would solve the "double header" problem. |
Do you mean that the losers bracket can never do better than 3rd/bronze? |
No. I mean, once a team has played X-2 or X-3 games in an X-round tournament, the brackets then get folded in. In effect, the semis or quarters are for teams with 0 or 1 losses. Not sure how it would be implemented here, but I've been in a lot of these tourneys, local Magic club did it that way, and it went nicely.
Another way to do it would be to have no OT in the final, and the 1-loss team must affirmatively win, with ties going to the unbeaten one. |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Feb 28, 2014 - 18:49 |
|
| Christer wrote: | | but for now I'm focusing all my development time on league changes (custom rosters to begin with). |
Hurray! Hurray! Hurray! |
_________________
 |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 28, 2014 - 18:59 |
|
| JackassRampant wrote: | | koadah wrote: | | JackassRampant wrote: | | Often, the last round or two or whatever is presented as single-elimination. That would solve the "double header" problem. |
Do you mean that the losers bracket can never do better than 3rd/bronze? |
No. I mean, once a team has played X-2 or X-3 games in an X-round tournament, the brackets then get folded in. In effect, the semis or quarters are for teams with 0 or 1 losses. Not sure how it would be implemented here, but I've been in a lot of these tourneys, local Magic club did it that way, and it went nicely.
|
So you could have two teams with only one defeat? Doesn't sound fair to me. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - 19th June! ---- All Star Bowl XII - Teams of Stars - Sign up NOW! |
|
|
|
Finishing the 60 Gam...
Search
