| Welcome Guest | Login |
Index
| Recent Threads
| Register
| Search
| Help
| 
| View Unanswered Threads
|
 |
Forums » List all forums » Forum: Davy Jones' Locker » Thread: Running single elimination tourneys |
|
Thread Status: Normal Total posts in this thread: 39
|
[Add To My Favorites] [Watch this Thread] [Post new Thread] |
| Author |
|
|
garf
|
as most of the people running tourneys seem to have slight problems working out a fair procedure, here be what is commonly (not jest in this game) is considered to be the best procedure for a standard single elimination tourney. for this, we'll start out with seeded (*) tourneys, as that will automagically take care of a fair bye distribution. start out with a list of the players, sorting them by estimated strength, such that 1 is strongest, n (the highest number) the weakest. fill that list up to the next power of two (**) if it isnt a power of 2 already; use byes for that. so from this point on, we consider our number of participiants to be a power of 2. n+1,...,2^something be byes then. next, draw a tree similar to this example: --------| add more rounds depending on size, of course. now comes the tricky part - how to decide who goes where in the tree. for this, start out with the initial pairs: strongest plays weakest, 2nd from top plays 2nd from bottom and so on. to determine the next rounds pairing, presume that the higher seeds in a pair win, so we will call the winner of the match [seed 1 - seed 2^l] seed 1. then simply repeat the procedure of pairing first seed with last seed (which now is 2^(l-1)), 2nd seed with 2nd from last and so on. repeat that process for all rounds until the finals. the tree for 8 seeded players looks like this then: 1st--------| and thats it. for unseeded tourneys, jest randomise the seeds (but put the byes in after randomising!). if ye need to have more than first and second decided, let the losers of semi finals play for third, the losers of quarterfinals a mini-tourney for 5th to 7th and so on. the advantage of doing this is that a) ye only have byes in the first round, as byes in later rounds can be quite unbalancing, b) ye have a true final match, c) if ye play seeded, the tournament is likely giving the most accurate results. i hope this helps some of ye tourney-runners. (*) seeded tourneys mean that the participiants are paired up considering their strength in such a way that the strongest players meet as late as possible. in ypp, that could be done by rating, obviously. (**) 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, ... (Edit by Artemis: I just wanted to put in the text for a 32 person Sword Tournament)
---------------------------------------- - Randal [size=9]also Garf, Silvain and a few others |
||
|
|
HuskyTed
Joined: Jul 29, 2003 Posts: 2197 Status: Offline |
Nice info, Garf. I hope everyone who hosts a tournament reads this. There have been far too many unorganized tournaments going on. I had a unexpected late problem with byes at the one I hosted at Sarchan & Alexiss's wedding... but that's just because I can't count. (that's what I get for going to art school) Personally, I'm not a big fan of seeded tournaments, I'm a random kinda guy, but I do see the benefits. If I may offer up a bit of advice; make sure you have your bracket drawn out before you begin the tournament. People may complain that you're taking too long, but the headache you save is worth it. ------------------------- HuskyTed -Who beat Garf at swords once (out of three) ---------------------------------------- Llama's like candy coated bunny holding a daisy and a puppy in one hand and a kitten in the other nice -Misery avatar by Noxi |
||
|
|
garf
|
aye, that be why i explained how to make them non-seeded from this. the benefit of still going the same way is that it takes care of the byes in a mechanic way. and about the tree - note that ye can pre-draw such trees (or download them, possibly; i didnt find them on a quick google, though) with the seed numbers placed long before the tourney. then ye jest have to list people and write them into the plan. ---------------------------------------- - Randal [size=9]also Garf, Silvain and a few others |
|||
|
|
Drabillord
Joined: Jun 22, 2003 Posts: 1018 Status: Offline |
garf..yer brains far exceed mine :) Finally i'l stop having the blasted problem of bye's so late in the tourney :) |
||
|
|
NinjaGuy
Joined: Aug 4, 2003 Posts: 1632 Status: Offline |
While this is a good idea, I kind of wonder if you have ever been to a sword tourny ;) They are usually so chaotic it would be near impossible to organize all of that. ---------------------------------------- Ninjaguy - Captain of the Mad Mutineers, Prince of the Midnight Armada |
||
|
|
garf
|
i would roughly estimated to have participated in 10 larger sword tourneys so far, and the reason for me posting this is that they be so chaotic... i dont see how this was in any way more work than what most people do - draw pairs. you do the same here, nothing more. the trees are not even necessary, but it will actually make running the tourney *easier* if you draw the tree before. then you will only have to draw pairs once and have *all* pairings for the whole tourney set with that. this *reduces* work to be done during the tourney. ---------------------------------------- - Randal [size=9]also Garf, Silvain and a few others |
||
|
|
Artemis
OceanMaster Joined: Sep 9, 2003 Posts: 6604 Status: Online |
Garf, just wanted to thank you for the tree you made, it was definitely helpful in making my own for the mini-tournament we had yesterday. The pre-made tree is definitely good to have for typing in names. I posted my 32-person tree for anyone who is interested in using it. What I also used was Excel, so that I could alphabetize the names and delete any duplicate names (which there almost always are!) To simplify things since I was dealing with about 32 people (which doesn't sound like alot, but it is!) I simply used the alphebetized list of everyone's names and put them into the tree straight from there. I then posted the tree to the events forum for easy reference for everyone. This eliminates alot of the hassle of calling out names of partners. |
||
|
|
homullus
Joined: Dec 10, 2002 Posts: 8824 Status: Offline |
Having helped run one tourney, I agree wholeheartedly with garf . . . you wouldn't think that having the bracket drawn would help, but it WILL. Even better is to print it out and write the names in, rather than wearing out your TAB key. The OTHER big tip I would add is having an entry fee, even if it's one PoE. I got this from shockedfrog's thing somewhere else, but it's a huge pain to get /tells from everywhere, and continually have to scroll through your still-growing chatlog to figure out whom to add. With an entry fee, you do them one at a time in trade, rather than by /tells. The last tip would be to have the registration end at least 15 minutes before the tournament starts, and make that clear when people register. If you're doing a seeded tournament, you will need more time to check people's ratings. This would be an argument for having a Pirate Mean Time, maybe with new-fangled and (game-money) expensive clock towers or sundials on tournament greens. Mostly, it's so that there is an agreed-upon idea of "late". |
||
|
|
Amberyl
Joined: Jul 30, 2003 Posts: 850 Status: Offline |
What's the process for constructing a double-elimination tournament? ---------------------------------------- Amberyl, SO, Cult of the Red Mantis, Looterati Reading the forums a lot is like camping clue. --homullus |
||
|
|
Cleaver
Captain Joined: May 7, 2002 Posts: 3135 Status: Offline |
One tip I have is to create the tree and *post* it to the forums, so that instead of calling out all the names you can just point people at the tree. |
||
|
|
Sugarpie
|
I actually had no trouble with double name entry or anything with my tournament. I had my slave, er, partner in crime Aiz taking all the poe and feeding me 5-10 names at a time, I entered them into my brackets and away we went :) I put names down in order that I got them, I spaced them 4+ apart if they were in the same crew to try to make sure that crewmates didn't fight each other in early rounds (Only 2 sets of crewmates fought each other before the final 5). Contrary to Garf and Silverdawg's mumblings and grumblings I liked the round-robin final 5 and I think it worked out really well with each of them getting something :) I don't like seeing two people sitting out in early rounds when they could both be fighting each other (this is my swordfighting addict side). Nor do I feel like trying to tell 8 people they can't play or try to get 56 more people to come join my tourney. Next time I'll add a clause about the potential round robin finals :P ---------------------------------------- Sugarpie The Violet (er... Violent?) Pirate Member of Black Death Former Governor of Orca Piggy Josiah R.I.P. ---------------------------------------- [Edit 1 times, last edit by Sugarpie at Sep 29, 2003 3:36:05 AM] |
||
|
|
Sugarpie
|
Cleaver ninjaposted while I was typing...
I cannot imagine telling 76 people to go look at the website and then try to find their partners. Heck, I'd bet that 15-20% of them don't even know that there is a forum on the website. There were at least two yesterday in Artemis's tourney that couldn't find the thread for a good 5 minutes and that was only 32 people. In the giant mass chaos and confusion of my tourney this weekend I shouted them all off and didn't have a single person have to ask "who am I playing?!??!" I also can't imagine trying to make a copy on the website with a tournament that large. ---------------------------------------- Sugarpie The Violet (er... Violent?) Pirate Member of Black Death Former Governor of Orca Piggy Josiah R.I.P. |
|||
|
|
Jer
|
A double-elimination tournament is a tournament that theoretically involves a secondary bracket. When using the secondary bracket as a loser's bracket, you should fill the bracket as the first round progresses. A couple of notes on competition formats: 1. Standard elimination bracket - A solid, good format. But keep in mind that it gets messy if the number of competitors doesn't equal an exponent of 2 (2, 4, 8, 16, 32, etc.). In the case of extra competitors, you can either have preliminary matches to eliminate people and even the bracket, or you can have byes. Byes are a good way to work around an odd number of competitors, but remember: It's very important to have all your byes in the first round. Leaving your byes until later rounds can have a serious impact on the final outcome of your tournament. 2. Round Robin - Not everyone is familiar with this format, so let's review: A round robin format is the most accurate type of system when it comes to tournaments. In this system, everyone plays everyone, and is therefore the best judge of where people stand in relationship to one another. However, the round robin is also the slowest and most time-consuming method of tournament organization. Observe:  Here's a standard round robin table. In this case, there are 5 competitors, who all get a chance to play against one another. Whenever a round is completed, mark an "W" for a win, or a "L" for a loss. When the table is complete, count the wins and losses. Obviously, the amount of time involved in this increases exponentially with the more people that want to participate. Personally, I think the best system is a standard elimination bracket to start with, and then a round robin between semi-finalists to determine the final winner. ---------------------------------------- [size=9]I'm Jericho. |
||
|
|
kevmon0
|
ok i dunno if ye guys are a little confused on tourny brackets or not but im looking for some good examples for ye cuase i've run a few tournys at a arcade b4 these are some but imma see if i can find the perfect 1 for ye ^^ http://www.darters.com/ http://www.quakecon.org/tournament.rtcwbrackets.html http://www.aenetwork.com/vbr/brackets/12team.htm ---------------------------------------- [Edit 1 times, last edit by kevmon0 at Sep 29, 2003 4:15:03 AM] |
||
|
|
Jer
|
Nicely done! ---------------------------------------- [size=9]I'm Jericho. |
|||
|
|
kevmon0
|
np need and more hhelp just /tell kevmon |
||
|
|
SiLVeRD
Joined: Aug 1, 2003 Posts: 658 Status: Offline |
sugarpie lollypop =P I mean normallly contests would expect the host to follow the official rules that were posted. I mean what if you were in the tourn where the host randomly decided that for one round anybody who won their match actually lost and made the losers continue on or if host just decided to change the prize froma 10k pot to 4 foils after a 500 entry fee? (i know these examples are extreme but it just to illustrate how changes especially late in tourns well after they started,..aren't that err appreciated? So garf andI have reason to be well "grumbly") Ohhh and another thing with Tournies...Everybody PLLLLZ take the time and just give massive byes the first round...i don't know how you guys feel but late round byes i think are a lot more shaddy then early ones. Oh and getting people to look at a website / bracket who they are hitting isn't that bad at all (check the 6th blackdeath tourny *note it also had byes in the beginning =P*, only had technical problems with website but if u get that down ;) *rif get it to WORK*) suuuugar suggar dun dun duunnna dun dunn honey honey duhh dun dunnna dunnnn you are my candy girrrrllll sugarpie i didn't mean to really pick on you or anything, my post is a general commentary on tournaments. Your tourny was good (garf bying in the 4th round *cough*, round robin change in the final 5 *cough*cough*) but its alllll good....i still won it anyways hahaha sorry ken you are still my bud BlackDeath bayyybe ---------------------------------------- The one & only SD, often imitated but never duplicated If you gonna shoot for the stars, then just shoot me If you let me you won't regret me, Shii, if you let me you won't forget me |
||
|
|
NinjaGuy
Joined: Aug 4, 2003 Posts: 1632 Status: Offline |
One of us is apperently misunderstanding something here (probably me) but I'm not saying that making the bracket and plopping names into it would take a lot of work, it's the seeding. To seed people you would need to do a /who on every fighter and check their stats, which would not only be anoying, but with the impatients of many people you would lose half your fighters. ---------------------------------------- Ninjaguy - Captain of the Mad Mutineers, Prince of the Midnight Armada ---------------------------------------- [Edit 1 times, last edit by NinjaGuy at Sep 29, 2003 6:51:46 AM] |
|||
|
|
Sugarpie
|
3rd round :) only one bye the entire tournament though. I will never give mass byes because how is it fair for half of the tournament to fight an extra game to have to win? Imho, less fair than to give one person a bye in a round when there's still more than a dozen people in the tournament. People show up to swordfight, not to wait so the field can be weeded out. I thought mass byes in Aiz's wedding tourney was crappy and at the onset of my tourney I didn't think that we'd have so freaking many people :) But it was good to have a high turnout, just I will know to include for round robins in the future :P ---------------------------------------- Sugarpie The Violet (er... Violent?) Pirate Member of Black Death Former Governor of Orca Piggy Josiah R.I.P. |
|||
|
|
MrMacintosh
|
http://www.sound.net/~jimbarr/pplofkc/sharware.html -Macintosh |
||
|
|
garf
|
if ye actually want to draw the tree, it becomes a lot more complicated. i'll see if i can come up with a easy-to-follow instruction fer it later. ---------------------------------------- - Randal [size=9]also Garf, Silvain and a few others |
|||
|
|
garf
|
technically, the number of matches increases "only" polynomial, namely with n*(n-1) matches for n players, and the number of rounds to be played only increases linearly with number of participiants (everyone has to play n-1 matches). that said, it still gets impractical already with 10 players, let alone standard numberes of 30+ participiants. also, it gets really complicated to set up the matches in a way that everyone can play each round with rising number of participiants. standard single elimination only takes logarithmically many rounds to play, which is the reason why doubling the number of participiants jest requires one additional round. ---------------------------------------- - Randal [size=9]also Garf, Silvain and a few others |
|||
|
|
garf
|
arr, that be true. as i tried to point out, the seeding be totally optional, and so far noone has done it yet to me knowledge. however, i could well imagine a tourney doing that if ye handle signup via the boards here well before tourney start, for example. also, i would hope that when the ringers implement automated tourney systems, they will have the option to make it seeded, as it would certainly be a very easy thing to do code-wise. ---------------------------------------- - Randal [size=9]also Garf, Silvain and a few others |
|||
|
|
deathprog23
Joined: Sep 3, 2003 Posts: 353 Status: Offline |
Anyone any ideas for how to organise drinkin' tourneys? ---------------------------------------- "I wanna be like the ocean, no talkin' an' all action." Jane's Addiction, Ocean Size |
||
|
|
jvaldez
Joined: Aug 11, 2003 Posts: 186 Status: Offline |
Maybe someone suggested it, and I missed the line, but why not, instead of having mass byes, split the fighters into two trees? That is, if you had 48 competitors, have a tree of 32 and a tree of 16, not 16 byes, nor late round byes. Sure, my example's contrived, but if you split the numbers up just right, a double tree sytem can work. As for fighters who have to fight an extra match, sure it's a pain, but if they're so great they shouldn't have a problem. At least, in theory. ---------------------------------------- Juanita Senior Officer and Surgeon of The Phoenix Warriors |
||
|
Guest
|
Winners Bracket: G1 Alpha vs Bravo........G5 Winner G1 vs Winner G2 G2 Charlie vs Delta.......G6 Winner G3 vs Winner G4 G3 Echo vs Foxtrot G4 Golf vs Hotel............G7 Winner G5 vs Winner G6 Losers Bracket G8 Loser G1 vs Loser G2............. G12 Winner G10 vs Winner G11 G9 Loser G3 vs Loser G4............. G13 Winner G12 vs Loser G7 G10 Winner G8 vs Winner G9.........Championship G14/G15 (if necessary) G11 Loser G5 vs Loser G6..............Winner G7 vs Winner G13 Tried to do out the tree, but when I tried to preview, it totally fubar'ed it. |
||
|
|
garf
|
that is exactly the same thing as having 16 byes in the first round, mate. ---------------------------------------- - Randal [size=9]also Garf, Silvain and a few others |
|||
|
|
akebia
|
In the February 2000 issue of The American Mathematical Monthly, there is an article titled "What is the Correct Way to Seed a Knockout Tournament?" It took me a while to find the right back issue, but now I can post it the summary. The methods of seeding the tournament are based on a few assumptions, such as the ability to rank teams fairly. (If A is seeded higher than B, then A is more likely to win. If B is seeded higher than C, then A's chances of beating C are greater than its chances of beating B and also greater than B's chances of beating C.) The author also proposes a few axioms to make an interesting tournament. To save the more exciting games for later, two teams in the top 2^n shouldn't meet each other until it's unavoidable. The schedule should never be set up so that a higher seeded team would prefer to trade with a lower seed, or else teams will slack off during the regular season. Things like that. After some bad examples, the author considers the method used most often these days, found in places like the NCAA tournament. This one sets up the matches such that, if the higher seed always wins, then, when there are 2^n teams left in the tournament, the two opponents' seeds should add to 1+2^n. That gives us the familiar: (1 vs 16) In general, this is a very good setup; it is the best you can do if you need to label the seeds on a tournament tree before you know which teams have which seeds. The author finds a few strange situations where it breaks apart. though: if team 5 is nearly as good as 3 and 4, and teams 6 through 8 are much worse, then team 2 has a better chance of making the finals than team 1! It's contrived, but there you have it. The author recommends grouping the teams into larger groups: 3 and 4 go together in G1, 5 through 8 are G2, 9 through 16 are G3, and so on. Take the above tournament tree and replace teams 3 and under with their groups' label. After the regular season is completed, randomly assign teams to the tree based on their groups-- flip a coin to figure out if team 3 gets the upper G1 spot or the lower one, and put team 4 in the other one. This method is deemed the fairest, as no teams will purposely damage their seed just to get a better spot on the tournament tree. It also has the extra benefit that organizers don't have to worry too much about explicitly seeding the lower brackets. Rather than deciding if a team is 58th or 59th overall, judges can just place it in G5 and move on. February 2000 makes for some good readin': You can also read articles titled "Crofton's Differential Equation", "The Anti-Social Fermat Number", and "$\delta$ As a Continuous Function of $x$ and $\epsilon$". |
||
|
|
atteSmythe
Joined: Jul 28, 2003 Posts: 8052 Status: Offline |
Arr! I knew those islands were linked! If only we could find the mysterious Island X, we'd hold the key! atteSmythe, who's also interested because reportedly, X marks the spot ----------------------------------------
|
|||||
|
|
garf
|
i fail to see that. lets follow their paths: 1-16. easy. 1-8. easy. 1-(4 or 5) kinda difficult. 2-15. easy. 2-7. easy. 2-3 about as difficult as 1-4, not easier. so at best, chances for team 2 are the same as for team 1. i fail to see where team 2 has better chances. ---------------------------------------- - Randal [size=9]also Garf, Silvain and a few others |
|||
|
|
[Show Printable Version of Thread] [Post new Thread] |
Powered by mvnForum
mvnForum copyright © 2002-2006 by MyVietnam.net