Jump to content


Photo

Obsolete Questions


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
24 replies to this topic

#1 TheOptician

TheOptician

    General

  • Tournament Manager
  • 2,348 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 13 March 2016 - 07:02 PM

Ask your questions here about the Champions League 2016 and a member of TC will get back to you.



#2 Aris1970

Aris1970

    Major

  • Greek Tournament Manager
  • 1,465 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Major

Posted 13 March 2016 - 07:14 PM

Champions League 2016       Aug 8 - Oct 23 ?    

                                             August is holiday month !



#3 astros

astros

    Major

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,224 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Scout

Posted 13 March 2016 - 07:15 PM

How will it be seeded, am I likely to be in the top 48?

 

An idea that I had was that those knocked out in the qualifying rounds of tier 1 would join tier 2. The same was those knocked out in the CL qualifying rounds join the euro league in football.


  • maxroelofs likes this
3 - 0

#4 TheOptician

TheOptician

    General

  • Tournament Manager
  • 2,348 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 13 March 2016 - 09:12 PM

>How will it be seeded?

The ranking used for seeding will be Maximum ELO (historically) according to the Clean Ranking. 

 

Everyone who registers has the opportunity to qualify for Tier 1, with only 32 being successful. TC has yet to decide exactly how the structure of the qualifying round will operate, but here's a crude example:

 

52 players register --> These players are Ranked 1 to 52 --> A Seeded Qualifying Stage(s) eliminates 20 players and reduces the participants to 32 --> These players form Tier 1.

The remaining 20 players who did not qualify for Tier 1 are involved in another Qualifying Stage(s) which reduces the participants to 16 --> These players form Tier 2.

The remaining 4 players do not qualify for either Tier.

 

>An idea that I had was that those knocked out in the qualifying rounds of tier 1 would join tier 2.

This is effectively correct. Tier 2 will be made up entirely of those who did not qualify for Tier 1. 



#5 TheOptician

TheOptician

    General

  • Tournament Manager
  • 2,348 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 13 March 2016 - 09:22 PM

Champions League 2016       Aug 8 - Oct 23 ?    

                                             August is holiday month !

 

Is this a question? 

 

Post-qualification, from Group Stage to Final the duration of the tournament should only last 7 weeks (at a rate of 1 game per week). 11 weeks have been estimated so as to include the Qualification Stages. At this stage TC don't know how fixture-intensive August will be, and this will likely depend on numbers and the format that the Qualifying stages take. It could be one game to play in August to qualify, or it could be as many as 4. (More is likely for the lower ranked players).

 

If for example you have a 2 week absence in August I wouldn't expect that this would stop you from entering, provided you were explicit from the outset about your period of absence.

 

If your absence is longer than 2 weeks it is not likely going to be something that TC can cater for.



#6 Aris1970

Aris1970

    Major

  • Greek Tournament Manager
  • 1,465 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Major

Posted 02 May 2016 - 02:00 PM

>How will it be seeded?

The ranking used for seeding will be Maximum ELO (historically) according to the Clean Ranking. 

 

 

for unlisted players ?



#7 TheOptician

TheOptician

    General

  • Tournament Manager
  • 2,348 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 02 May 2016 - 02:03 PM

Unlisted players (who at one time did feature on the Clean Ranking List) will have a Max ELO (from before they were removed).

 

Unlisted players (who have never featured on the Clean Ranking List) will have their ELO used at close of registration.



#8 Vap0r

Vap0r

    Bomb

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 60 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold General

Posted 22 May 2016 - 07:07 AM

So if only 47 players Register and I am not higher rank, or whatever you want to measure skill as, than 31 players, will I be sat out?

 

Also what happens if we exceed 48? Would the lowest get sat out?

 

Thanks! =)



#9 TheOptician

TheOptician

    General

  • Tournament Manager
  • 2,348 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 22 May 2016 - 11:43 AM

Vap0r,

 

Every player will have the opportunity to qualify for the Champions League.

 

Some players will qualify for Tier One, some players will qualify for Tier 2, and (if there are more than 48 players) some players will be eliminated.

 

But, whilst some byes are inevitable, no player is excluded from the opportunity to qualify.

 

The exact nature of the Qualifying Stage will be announced as soon as it is finalised.



#10 TheOptician

TheOptician

    General

  • Tournament Manager
  • 2,348 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 29 May 2016 - 09:33 PM

This follows on from some points raised in this topic (http://forum.strateg...est-five/page-3) that are directly related to the TC season.

Organising a Champions League

Perhaps the first thing to note is that the structure of a Champions League tournament is a group stage followed by a knock-out. This means that:
1. The number of players that qualify from the Group Stage needs to be a power of 2 (eg 8,16,32)
2. In order to provide 16 qualifiers, the number of groups must also be a power of 2 (eg 2,4,8,16)
3. To apply the principle of ‘no byes’, and to be fair to all players, each group must have the same number of players.
4. In order to keep the tournament duration within 11 weeks, group sizes may not exceed 8.
 
Keeping all the above in mind, this means that the format of the Champions League has to be one of the following options:
fnHgFiX.jpg

 

Now should the number of players who register be exactly 32,40,48,56 or 64, then there is no problem – everyone can participate without the need for a Qualifying Round. If however the number of participants is not one of the above numbers then there needs to be a Qualifying Stage to reduce the number of participants to a number that works. This means that between 1 and 7 players will need to be eliminated from a Qualifying Round. (or possibly more, should the number of participants exceed 71).

 

This gives two options:
1. Everybody must be involved in qualifying
Or
2. A selected group must be involved in qualifying

Option 2 is administratively easier.

Option 1 is the fairest choice – but qualifying rounds take time. Consider that you may need to eliminate 7 players from a pool of 63. Still, byes are unavoidable. 7 players would have to qualify automatically. The remaining 56 play each other to produce 28 losers, who then play each other producing 14 losers, who then play each other again producing 7 losers. Lose 3 times and you are out (‘Reverse Elimination’) – and we have our 56 players which is now a workable number. The qualifying process has taken 3 weeks.

But the above is a relatively quick and easy example. Consider that you may need to eliminate 1 player from a pool of 65. Using the same method, this would take 6 weeks – just to eliminate 1 player!

From a practical perspective, it makes sense to use either option 1. or option 2. This depends completely on the number of registered players.

In this difficult example of 65 registered players, only 8 players would be involved in the Reverse Elimination. The losers play against each other until 1 is eliminated. This also takes 3 weeks. Now we have a workable number, yet 57 have qualified automatically and 8 have had to qualify.

The two above examples illustrate the difficulty in planning such a tournament where you do not know the number of players that will participate. It is all very well to say let’s just have x players with y groups of x players, but as far as I am aware psychic ability is not yet commonplace.

This leaves the difficult question of ‘Who should be selected automatically?’

Now you might well say that it doesn’t really matter. With a player having to lose 3 games to be eliminated, then you could well argue that no-one could reasonably complain of a bad draw.

Let’s move to the Champions League main phase. The big question is how do you select which player is in which group? Here is where your opinion on seeding comes into play. If you are against seeding, or you don’t think that there is a good method of seeding then you may prefer a random draw. Feasibly, Hielco and co all end up together in the Group of Death. This makes a great group, and Javier Flag would probably write an extensive preview, but conversely you might argue that this isn’t really in keeping with the idea of a Champions League.

If you were of this latter opinion, then you may decide that segregating players into ‘pools’ is the way forward. Perhaps, now that you know (for example) that you have 8 groups of 8, you could split all players into 8 pools, with each group having one player from each pool. You’d still have to decide the method of pooling players.

This site uses ELO as an indicator of ability. No-one thinks that ELO is the only indicator of ability – other indicators may include the Kleier ranking or tournament performance.  But crucially ELO is the only rating that we can guarantee that all registered players will have. New players won’t have a tournament history to go by. If you were to ignore ELO, how would you seed or pool all players?
 
As has already been published, TC have not decided how the Qualifying Stage will work exactly yet. This is because the practical issues are far more difficult then they may at first appear – and these mainly relate to the number of participants, the method of selecting qualifiers, and the method of seeding. It is why I have felt it necessary to illustrate some of the difficulties in organising a tournament of this type, because it is only when you actually try and work out the numbers that you realise this. I am going to recommend that TC re-considers everything again before publishing the finalised format.

Personally on reflecting again on this tournament, I do not think that restricting the number of players in a Champions League to 32 is necessary – and so nor is a Tier 1 and a Tier 2 system. As the Maestro pointed out, you could just run 8 groups of 8 for example.

If there is anything else that any player wishes to point out that has not been covered above, now would be a great time to do so. As always, TC is here to serve the player pool – regardless of age, quality or experience, and we do take your feedback on board. 



#11 The Prof

The Prof

    Major

  • NASF Committee
  • 1,462 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Scout

Posted 30 May 2016 - 12:33 AM

I like the idea of one big tournament, as opposed to a two tier system.  I see this type of tournament as a perfect complement to the Masters Divisions since in those all games are between players of similar skill levels, whereas here all divisions will be mixed.  However, if there are 6, 7, or 8 players per group, I would suggest that the top three in each group advance.  This would keep hope alive for players who may not be doing so well halfway through the group stage.  The 8 group winners would earn a bye for the first knockout round, and all the #2s would play #3s from different groups to see who would join the #1s in the final 16.

 

This does add another week to the schedule, but to help with the time frame I would suggest an idea to eliminate the need to have pre-tournament qualifying matches:  Don't require that there be the same number of players in each group.  If 61 players sign up then 5 groups have 8 and 3 have 7.  This may sound unfair to the players in the larger group, but if the seeding is done properly then it is only a small disadvantage because the 8th players in the group will be the lowest seeds, and players seeking to advance should be expected to beat the lowest seed in their group, right?  For example, here's how the seeding would look in the case of 61 players.  See what you think:  https://snag.gy/xknyPm.jpg   

 

If more than 64 players register, then you could have 16 groups of either 4 or 5 players.  Here you wouldn't need to have more than two qualifiers per group but since the group stage is much shorter you still might want to have three advance.  Even though that makes it fairly "easy" to qualify for the knockout rounds, there would still be a strong incentive to finish first in the group to earn the bye. 



#12 scottrussia

scottrussia

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 719 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze General

Posted 30 May 2016 - 01:57 AM

I like Prof's idea.

 

For rankings - why not have the TC do the seeding for the tournament.  That allows you the flexibility to use ELO as your "guide" but to make some changes as you see fit.  So if someone has an ELO of 600 but is a prior World Champion of Stratego you could seed them as a 2 seed in one division, etc to try to "balance" each group.  Since everyone will be in a group I don't think many will really care where they are seeded. 

 

It makes no sense to spend 3 weeks eliminating a couple of players. 

 

Just as a sidenote - I don't really know how the Champions League works - but I think the WC does random draws.  Groups of death aren't necessarily bad IMO.


  • Napoleon 1er likes this

​Spartan Warriors

KING of the Battlefield!!!!!!


#13 The Maestro

The Maestro

    Major

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,217 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Scout

Posted 30 May 2016 - 06:42 AM

It's obvious we are not "there" yet but are moving in the right direction as TheO's/TC's is showing

 

This follows on from some points raised in this topic (http://forum.strateg...est-five/page-3) that are directly related to the TC season.

 

Organising a Champions League

..

 
As has already been published, TC have not decided how the Qualifying Stage will work exactly yet. This is because the practical issues are far more difficult then they may at first appear – and these mainly relate to the number of participants, the method of selecting qualifiers, and the method of seeding. It is why I have felt it necessary to illustrate some of the difficulties in organising a tournament of this type, because it is only when you actually try and work out the numbers that you realise this. I am going to recommend that TC re-considers everything again before publishing the finalised format.

 

I really appreciate this!! Ideas can seem nice but if they are not ENTIRELY worked-out beforehand they can turn into a huge disappointment, which could have been prevented. A Champions League in online stratego is very hard to set up because of the unknown (and potenially unlimited) amount of players that will register, how to seed them but also -very important- the "friend or like" aspect. 

 

Personally on reflecting again on this tournament, I do not think that restricting the number of players in a Champions League to 32 is necessary – and so nor is a Tier 1 and a Tier 2 system. As the Maestro pointed out, you could just run 8 groups of 8 for example.

 

Perfect. Thank you very much!

 

TC is here to serve the player pool – regardless of age, quality or experience

 

A Big thank you; that is exactly the main purpose/task of a TC, but one that can easily be forgotten when getting too excited. Great to see this as the main goal!

 

If there is anything else that any player wishes to point out that has not been covered above, now would be a great time to do so.

 

Since we are already moving on the "better no qualifying matches" (see post Prof)  and seeding (yes or no and if so how), I want to bring to attention probably the most important issue:

 

the "friend or like" aspect / planning of matches

That  one is essential and requires a very alert and active TC. TC should not only keep players interested as long as possible but also should not have a pre-set fixed program of the sequence of the matches in a group. That way the matches in the last rounds can be adjusted to having them mean the most, direct confrontations between the players that near the end of the tournament are in the running for qualification for the KO phase. Matches between players out of the running already, facing their friends (that only need a few more points to qualify) in the last 2-3 rounds should be avoided at all costs.

 


Edited by The Maestro, 30 May 2016 - 06:43 AM.


#14 KARAISKAKIS

KARAISKAKIS

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,277 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 30 May 2016 - 07:23 AM

 

This site uses ELO as an indicator of ability. No-one thinks that ELO is the only indicator of ability – other indicators may include the Kleier ranking or tournament performance.  But crucially ELO is the only rating that we can guarantee that all registered players will have. New players won’t have a tournament history to go by. If you were to ignore ELO, how would you seed or pool all players?
 

 

Combine kleier ranking and ELO. For those players who haven't yet rate in Kleier leaderboard , seed them according their stratego.com ELO, puting  them in positions after all the players who have rate in kleier or , intermediate,  in the space of 600 keier rate.  Fortunatelly atm 100 players have been seeded in Kleier leaderboard and this number after the update with the spring tournament results will be increased. New comers in CL (unrated players in kleier)  will be certainly few so i do not see any real problem.

Another option is to ignore ELO for all and seed all the players according Kleier rate. Players who haven't tournament history yet take rate of 600. The seeding of them is done randomly like in Swiss Perfect . This is the way we seed players in WCO and in all the live tournaments where SP is used



#15 TheOptician

TheOptician

    General

  • Tournament Manager
  • 2,348 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 30 May 2016 - 08:42 AM

Having a format that eliminates the Qualifying Stage would be ideal - TC could potentially stretch the tournament duration to an absolute maximum of 13 weeks. Thanks Prof for this great suggestion - the format would then take one of the below options.

TSEdU8B.jpg

 

Where the Total Qualifiers is 24, the group winners progress automatically, with second place of one group playing third place of another group in a play-off.

 

One of the concerns with having large group sizes and a longer duration for the group stage, is that players lose interest as the tournament progresses. But how do you keep players interested - you can only do so much. One suggestion is to keep Tier 2, but introduce it after the Group Stage.

 

Let's take for example the case of 48 players - which produces 24 qualifiers (see table above). After the 2nd and 3rd players have played-off for a place in the knock-out, the play-off losers move to Tier 2, where they are joined by the players who finished 4th in their groups, creating a Tier 2 knock-out of 16 players.

 

In the example of 64 players, all the players who finished 3rd in their group would advance to Tier 2 knock-out. This would give more players the opportunity to play a full Champions League competition, and keeps players incentivised throughout.

--------------------

 

>why not have the TC do the seeding for the tournament

 

Scott, are you suggesting that TC use their opinion on player ability? I think this would open up a world of trouble for TC to be involved in something like this. Other sports do use independent seeding panels, and in theory I don't object to this idea, but I doubt there is time to establish a Seeding Panel. Maybe next year.

 

>TC should not have a pre-set fixed program of the sequence of the matches in a group

>Matches between players out of the running already, facing their friends (that only need a few more points to qualify) in the last 2-3 rounds should be avoided at all costs

 

Maestro,

 

Clearly we don't want the situation where two players engineer a result for mutual benefit. With each position in the group determining your likely strength of opponent I think this is only a very small likelihood, but this is not to say that TC shouldn't look out for this as a possibility. In reality, this is only really a potential issue when group sizes are 4, and two players know that they can come to an arrangement. However, this only becomes apparent to them when there is only one game left for each player, so as much as you want to avoid this scenario, you cannot. Sometimes what you are trying to avoid becomes the reality. (You may have left Seed 1 v Seed 2 til the last week, to decide the group winner, but it then becomes possible for both players to 'arrange' a draw for example). 

 

There has to be a program and this is because without a program, players may play their matches at a slower rate, resulting  in delays. In Masters Divisions we specified a program, but also allowed players to re-schedule games to other weeks if they were unavailable. It makes sense to organise the fixtures by seeding (so that Seed 1 plays Seed 2 last for example), with TC possibly changing around a fixture or two in the last couple of weeks.



#16 scottrussia

scottrussia

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 719 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze General

Posted 30 May 2016 - 11:10 AM

I'm suggesting that you use ELO as your guide but that you allow yourself the flexibility to change the seeds of a few players. 

 

So I'm not suggesting a free for all - which would indeed make the TC the most disliked group of folks and I can just imagine the posts.

 

But if there are one, two, three or four players that have past accomplishments that merit a high ranking then give it to them.  I wouldn't spend any time worrying if Spartan Warriors should be a 6 or a 7 seed.  But you might spend a little time trying to balance out the 1 and 2 seeds according to a combination of ELO and TC opinion (which I would hope would be based on past results in tournaments).

 

Lets face it - no matter how its done someone will say there is an easy group and they are in a harder group.  If everyone is included then I say oh well, tough cookies.  Win your games and advance!


​Spartan Warriors

KING of the Battlefield!!!!!!


#17 scottrussia

scottrussia

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 719 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze General

Posted 30 May 2016 - 11:13 AM

In regards to a tier two.  I just want to point out that I've noticed a lot of no-shows for the double elimination tournament - I assume they are in the rehab bracket.

 

So unless folks really believe there will be a true competition it might be best to run the tournament and if I don't advance I have some extra time to come up with my new plan of attack for the next tournament :)


​Spartan Warriors

KING of the Battlefield!!!!!!


#18 The Maestro

The Maestro

    Major

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,217 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Scout

Posted 30 May 2016 - 12:27 PM

It is just great to see how we are now all together on the same page using a total package approach (building the entire house) by just using reason and being pragmatic (realistic approach instead of a wait and see one)! This is the only way to go and we can be proud of the results thusfar: 

 

TC is here to serve the player pool – regardless of age, quality or experience

 

 

Combine kleier ranking and ELO.

New comers in CL (unrated players in kleier)  will be certainly few so i do not see any real problem.

 

 

Having a format that eliminates the Qualifying Stage would be ideal - TC could potentially stretch the tournament duration to an absolute maximum of 13 weeks. Thanks Prof for this great suggestion 

 

Of course we now have to use these bricks to build the house. Before continuing on CL we should always keep in mind (and sometimes take a step back to see the whole picture) that the endresult of the house is Masters 2016/17. That's what everything is leading to and the 3 floors of this house (ST, Summer and WT) should all contribute to that.

 

Back to CL

 

 

 the format would then take one of the below options.

TSEdU8B.jpg

 

Sidenote 65-79 should have 2 qualifiers per group and then 16 X 2 = 32 Total qualifiers or if they have 3 per group I am not sure how 16 x 3 =24 (??)

 

Where the Total Qualifiers is 24, the group winners progress automatically, with second place of one group playing third place of another group in a play-off.

 

One of the concerns with having large group sizes and a longer duration for the group stage, is that players lose interest as the tournament progresses. But how do you keep players interested - you can only do so much. One suggestion is to keep Tier 2, but introduce it after the Group Stage.

 

Let's take for example the case of 48 players - which produces 24 qualifiers (see table above). After the 2nd and 3rd players have played-off for a place in the knock-out, the play-off losers move to Tier 2, where they are joined by the players who finished 4th in their groups, creating a Tier 2 knock-out of 16 players.

 

In the example of 64 players, all the players who finished 3rd in their group would advance to Tier 2 knock-out. This would give more players the opportunity to play a full Champions League competition, and keeps players incentivised throughout.

 

Interesting idea and perfectly serving the main goal: serve the ENTIRE player pool.

 

Now to your question: But how do you keep players interested - you can only do so much

 

In the 2 examples you gave (48 and 64 players) the results are:   

 

48: five rounds of groupmatches, which means every player plays at least 5 games. The numbers 5 and 6 of each group are then out which means they only played 5 games in total, where in divisions they would have played around 10 (so approx. they get only half now). 16 more players (8 in KO and 8 in Tier 2) are out with a total of 6 played games

 

64: (only) three rounds of groupmatches, which means every player plays at least 3 games. The numbers 4 of each group are then out which means they only played 3 games in total (!!!!), WAY too few compared to divisions and probably no fun at all losing all your matches (or close to that). another 24  players (16 KO and 8 Tier 2 ) are out with a total of only 4 played games. That is 40 players only playing 3 or 4 matches total!!!

 

So what I suggest is this: instead of Tier 2 a sort of divison like structure for those out of KO. Examples:

 

48: The numbers 5 and 6 of each group are out of the "CL" part and these 16 players are offered to enter the "5/6 division" where they will meet all the other  players in their league. We are talking here about 16 players. Probably not all will enter so if 12 will enter you can make 2 seprate groups (like divisions) so that each player has another 5 matches (more or less against their own level). Those 5 extra "rounds" are exactly the same as the 5 rounds that still will be played in KO. Next to the joy (and D4 but also D3 players always showed great joy in playing eachother) it also gives them a GREAT incentive as they can now get extra TRP. Instead of all players 5/6 being eliminated after Group phase and all given let's say 3 or 4 TRP, in a Group of 6 they now battle for them with the #1 getting 7, #5 getting 6 etc (just examples). The last in the group gets 2 (for example) and players bowing out after groupsphase/not joining the leagues get 1 TRP (again all examples, maybe there should be a minimum of 2 TRPs.

If needed you can add the #4 of each group (another 8 players) to these leagues as well, or wait until the 8 losers of the play off games between #2 and #3 are known so you have 16 or so players that you can let play their own leagues (either mixed 3/4, or a seperate one for 3 and one for 4). Again every participant will then receive a different amount of TRP giving them a GREAT incentive as those will probably be the deciding factor at the end of the season on which division they end up in. You could also do the same for the players that lose the final 16. The final 8 should just finish the tournament in KO Style. This will lead to a tournament of 10-11 weeks with ALL players that want to being active until the end, having fun and getting incentives. 

 

64 example:  The 16 numbers 4 are offered spots in leagues (probably better than to use the word "divison" to not create confusion) and probably split in 2 leagues, with a maximum of 7 rounds. Since KO will take another 6 weeks that is fine. The numbers 3 can get their own leagues (with higher TRPs to be won); this will also lead that during the groupsphase players won't lose interest as finishing as #3 will lead to entering a league with much more TRPs to be won. The 16 losers of Final 32 and later the losers of Final 16 can also be starting their own leagues. Again this will lead to EVERY participant receiving a different amount of TRP which will be huge fun in the race for divisions. 

 

If I missed something let me know, but I think I got it all covered.

 

PS. If there a two leagues at the same level (for example 2 leagues of #4 players, then of course in total NOT every player receives a different TRP as these two leagues will have the same TRP structure)

 

 

 


Edited by The Maestro, 30 May 2016 - 12:28 PM.


#19 TheOptician

TheOptician

    General

  • Tournament Manager
  • 2,348 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 30 May 2016 - 09:41 PM

>(The Maestro) Sidenote 65-79 should have 2 qualifiers per group and then 16 X 2 = 32 Total qualifiers or if they have 3 per group I am not sure how 16 x 3 =24 (??)

 

Yes this was a typo - thanks for pointing out.

 

In regards to your League suggestion for players that did not make the knock-outs, this would add a great deal of organising for TC. I understand that you are particularly enthusiastic about having large numbers of games for all players, but having to manage players to ensure that everyone plays their Division games takes considerable effort, and given that the Group Stages alone would in the above proposal likely end up with 5 to 7 games per player (if between 49 and 63 registrations,) this is already a solid commitment. To add a further 6 games per player would be a lot to take on, especially considering that TC are already running a team tournament in October. 

 

 

>(Scottrussia) In regards to a tier two.  I just want to point out that I've noticed a lot of no-shows for the double elimination tournament - I assume they are in the rehab bracket.

 

While no-shows really disrupt Group or League systems,  they have a relatively low impact in knock-out tournaments. If a player loses interest at some point in a knock-out stage this causes minimal disruption to proceedings as their opponent simply progresses. 

 

>(KARAISKAKIS) Combine kleier ranking and ELO

One proposal that was suggested internally within TC was to combine these rankings - with X ELO points being equivalent to Y Kleier points, and each player would use their 'best score' from these two options. This way a top player (for example) who only played very rarely would be able to use their Kleier score, if this was relatively higher (and vice versa).



#20 The Prof

The Prof

    Major

  • NASF Committee
  • 1,462 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Scout

Posted 08 June 2016 - 07:34 AM

>(KARAISKAKIS) Combine kleier ranking and ELO

One proposal that was suggested internally within TC was to combine these rankings - with X ELO points being equivalent to Y Kleier points, and each player would use their 'best score' from these two options. This way a top player (for example) who only played very rarely would be able to use their Kleier score, if this was relatively higher (and vice versa).

 

I think this is the best solution.  Using only ELO would be highly inaccurate as a method of seeding for certain players.  For example, if Playa1 participates he would be seeded much lower than his skill level, creating a likely "group of death".  A good way to relate ELO to Kleier would be to list all players who currently have both ELO and Kleier ratings and computing the average difference between the two ratings.  Then just subtract this difference from any player's Kleier rating to find his adjusted Kleier.  Once, a tournament roster is finalized, players could then be seeded by the maximum of their ELO and adjusted Kleier.


  • KARAISKAKIS likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users