RAD Around The World CUP Analysis

(Ciakgb) #41

Take my finals scenario. If the rule is that I need to get three POINTS, then my two wins and two draws would win for me. If the rule is three WINS, then I would not win. In chess, a draw is .5 points, a win is 1, and loss obvoiusly is zero…this is actually what started the war with ElCO, confusion about what are strategic goals were. If all he had to do was draw, there isn’t much way to stop that. Plus it just seemed wrong that you could draw up several scenario’s where the upper bracket winner actually never beats the lower bracket winner, but still wins.

As much as double elimination saved my behind, I’m not a fan. There are other ways to have full participation. The Swiss System everyone actually plays every round of the tourney! When you win, you face harder foes. When you lose, you get easier ones. It really is quite elegant and I swear you can run a perfectly fun, decisive tourney in a long weekend.

(Paul) #42

We will stick with the groups/double elimination system for two reasons:

  1. This is the only system digitally implemented at the moment
  2. Every (major) game runs competitions like this. It’s become a ‘standard’ where almost everyone is familiar with.

About draws: in the brackets you always make sure you have an uneven amount of matches each round (1,3,5,etc) so you will always have a winner at the end of the round. For group stages it doesn’t matter as there is no direct winner needed. For that reason, it wasn’t possible for you or EL-CO to play a draw in the brackets and therefore you would have always come to a result.

NOTE@REST
We will set the rules at friday and open the subscriptions friday. They will stay open until October 1st, which is the day we will start with the group stage.

(Ciakgb) #43

I mean, there is a reason they have soccer world cup every two years:)

(Ciakgb) #44

So what in your mind has actually changed for this tourney? 26 points is all I can detect…

(Ciakgb) #45

There are numerous programs that will handle all aspects of running a swiss system. The only thing you have to do is a seeding list to start, which shouldn’t be too hard with past results (newbies at the bottom).

(Ciakgb) #46

Is rad more like a video game or chess? My own experience aside, not sure why you’d have a final with absolutely zero drama. I will boldly predict that no Upper Bracket winner will ever lose…not much fun in that.

(Paul) #47

Things different are:

  • All matches will be 26 points
  • All matches will have (a) predetermined map(s).
  • Seeds will be applied for the group stage
  • In the Group Stage you will play only 2 maps per match
  • The upper bracket finalist will start with a 1-0 advantage in the grand final

Pretty much all the rules except one.

There is no chance we will be setting it up differently - we will stay at a bracket/group system. The rules that are now set as set will not be changed anymore. Discussion about other unset things can still go on but discussion the preset points is not of use anymore.

Main thing left to discuss is: is it needed to cut out certain maps?

(Ciakgb) #48

How about who goes first? Pretty big deal:)

(Mitsid) #49

Favela MUST be excluded. As for the Old town, if ciakgb believes it is good after update, we can trust him, but I am still very much concerned about it

(Ciakgb) #50

I’m for any map if its played first by both players. Old town could slow things down with certain pairings, I guess, I mean it is sniper central where as favella is more melee orientated. I always thought it was fair if both were present, especially with some of the fixed squad suggestions Sandman made.

Still really matters on pretty much any map who goes first, although I do sort of like going second at Old Town (especially if the opponent tries any kind of rush strategy).

So I guess I’m saying you don’t have to worry about the maps if you’ve worked out the 60% likelihood that whomever moves first will win. If you play both side of each map, all maps are fine. If you don’t, none of them are trully fair.

(Ciakgb) #51

Also all games should be played at once, like if its a three game match, all three should start at the same time. You cut the time by two thirds.

(Mitsid) #52

Ciakgb, do you really mean we should play EVERY map twice? Do we have enough time for it during cup?

(KINONEZ21) #53

I disagree that all 3 games should be played at once, about who goes first, I believe it should be the higher Seeded players in the group stage. in the bracket system, the first round the winner of the group should move fist, while the runner up of the different group should move second, and so on. If in the next round both group leaders pass, the first should be who ever got a higher score in the group. ex iof last cup. Sandman77 vz Kinonez21 Sandman should move first. Ciakgb vz Kinonez21 Ciakgb should move first. EL-CO vz Kinonez21 EL-CO should move first.

in the lower bracket, whoever arrives latter should move first.

if a dispute would arise Paul or his co-admin should decide

(Ciakgb) #54

I don’t really care as long as its worked out in advance. Last time was too stressful with the rush to be the first to challenge.

I think playing at once really would be a time saver, as far as I can tell nothing has changed to make anything move any faster. They are talking about trimming a few games from the start, but now we will be at 26 points, its going to be a long production again.

(Ciakgb) #55

Look, this is how I would do it. Round one, Ciakgb vs Mitsid on map X, two games each gets to go first, played at the same time. It wouldn’t matter who actually won, just your total score.

In a quad for example, you’d play three guys two games each, for a total of six. The best score of the four of you moves on…

In a swiss, you’d carry your total from round to round for your total score in the tourney.

In the brackets, just at least make it fair, you get two games as first, two games as second say in the first round.

I don’t know guys, we manage to do this every weekend in a chess tourney, everyone ends up with the same number of black games as white, usuing a variety of systems.

(KINONEZ21) #56

I prefer the current bracket system, why should we change it?

(Jerry-Rigs) #57

Personally, I appreciate Ciakgb’s concerns about the bracket system and understand his desire to move to a different tournament style. I think that there are a number of flaws that have been exposed in the implemented version. I think that the Tournament Director (Paul) has performed admirably considering how much he gets paid to do it. How much does a volunteer make?

If you have the digital resources to manage a tournament and know how to set them up and use them, running a tourney can be relatively easy. If you do not have the resources, or do not know how to set them up and use them, it’s a bitch. Either way, it takes time to learn and manage. Maybe lots of time. And commitment. It takes far less commitment and time to comment on someone elses work.

Paul, Thank you for time and commitment.

It’s just a game. It may be a tourney, but its still just a game. I play the game for fun. I do not consider arguing over the rules to be fun.

So do it.

Put your time and effort where your mouth it. Find your own resources. Setup your own tourny. Advertise in this forum. Manage it yourself. Handle the inevitable disputes. Read as others criticize your efforts. Show everybody the right way to do it instead of just talking about it. Until then, please lighten up.

(Jerry-Rigs) #58

I have some questions.

For this discussion, I define a match as 1 or more single games against a single opponent. How do you define it?

I am confused about “draws” in the group stage.
Are points awarded for games or for matches?
Does a “draw” apply to a game or a match?
Is a 2 game match is a draw if the players split games?
Is it by mutual agreement that a single game is a draw? How does that player transaction take place?

In group play, who goes first? I assume that is part of the pre-determined group matches.
In bracket play, who goes first?

(Paul) #59

[QUOTE=Jerry-Rigs;471469]I have some questions.

For this discussion, I define a match as 1 or more single games against a single opponent. How do you define it?

I am confused about “draws” in the group stage.
Are points awarded for games or for matches?
Does a “draw” apply to a game or a match?
Is a 2 game match is a draw if the players split games?
Is it by mutual agreement that a single game is a draw? How does that player transaction take place?

In group play, who goes first? I assume that is part of the pre-determined group matches.
In bracket play, who goes first?[/QUOTE]

Thanks for posting those, when creating a setting up rules and guidelines it’s very hard to predict what you need to clarify and what not. I’ve added the following things to my first post. Is it all more clear now?

(Ciakgb) #60

I don’t think I’m being heavy. Thank you Paul too. I do think Paul has acknowledged that he needs someone more active to help him. I did send him a PM and offered to help him for free (and not to play myself in the tourney).

That being said, neither tourney has actually had a final, not so great really, and I think we are headed for a rehashed set up essential exactly as flawed as the previous ones.

The thread was started specifically for analysis of the tourney, ie criticism, so I don’t think I’m missplaced in putting my frustrations here. I thought it was a really un fun experience, sounds like others felt dissatisfaction albeit about different things.

Anyway, Peace out everyone, I’m really not such a bad guy, hope you have fun with next tourney.