I agree that qualification is not ideal and you want to limit the process as much as possible. Therefore, we can be flexible with the starting number of entrants. The CL will work nicely for 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 64 contestants, (other numbers are possible, 56 is not terrible) so the TC should try to get as close as possible to one of those numbers.
For instance, this year I would have held off on starting the tournament until you got a 48th participant. Recruiting is always something I have been good at, the NASF averaged 200 percent more contestants when I was organizing for them, so this is theoretically something I could help the TC with.
If the TC does not want my help organizing, then it is a simple matter of eliminating only a few contestants. Choosing one of the "nice" numbers, we can ensure that we do not need to eliminate more than 7 players, ie 47 down to 40. A seeded qualification process implicitly has many games factored into it, particularly the one I proposed in Choosing a Ranking System, even if the actual qualification process is only 1 or 3 games.
If the players getting eliminated in the qualification stage are serious about Stratego, then they should have no problem qualifying for the CL the following year.
Table of different formats
32 players -> 16 advance (no byes)
40 players -> 20 advance (12 byes) -> 16 advance
48 players -> 24 advance (8 byes) -> 16 advance
64 players -> 32 advance (no byes)
Les "nice" numbers
36 players -> 18 advance (14 byes) -> 16 advance
44 players -> 22 advance (10 byes) -> 16 advanace
56 players -> 28 advance (4 byes) - > 16 advance
It ends up working for any number of players
Edited by astros, 24 April 2018 - 02:15 PM.
You're mom likes my grammar.