Author Topic: Official Nationals Top Cut Rules - please provide input (Read 24979 times)

SirNobody · « **Reply #100 on:** April 05, 2013, 06:29:15 PM »

Hey,

I ran some numbers. If you did a top 8 cut three rounds before the end of each national tournament since 2002 the winner would make the cut every time. Ten of those eleven years the winner would have made a top 4 cut (the one exception being Gabe's 2007 win.) 30 of the 35 people who placed over those 11 years would have made a top 8 cut. Only one player in the last five years that placed would have missed a top 8 cut and that was one of the three players that tied for 3rd in 09.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #101 on:** April 26, 2013, 01:43:18 PM »

Quote from: SirNobody on April 05, 2013, 06:29:15 PM

Hey,

I ran some numbers. If you did a top 8 cut three rounds before the end of each national tournament since 2002 the winner would make the cut every time. Ten of those eleven years the winner would have made a top 4 cut (the one exception being Gabe's 2007 win.) 30 of the 35 people who placed over those 11 years would have made a top 8 cut. Only one player in the last five years that placed would have missed a top 8 cut and that was one of the three players that tied for 3rd in 09.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

I've been been thinking about this, and I have finally come to the conclusion that this is the most feasible option right now.

Here's my proposal now:

7 rounds of Swiss play followed by a Top 8 cut double elimination (5 rounds long)

Is there any opposition?

I'd also like to voice that at a recent Pokemon tournament, the best time I had was watching games with people during the Top Cut. We had a stream of another Regional tournament that we discussed the plays being made, etc while also watching our friends gut it out for the title right before our eyes. It was some great community. Just a thought.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #102 on:** April 26, 2013, 02:32:16 PM »

Technically, it would only be 5 rounds if the winner went undefeated right? Else it would be 6 rounds?

Without loss of generality, assume the higher seed always wins for the first three rounds:

Round 1:

1 v 8
2 v 7
3 v 6
4 v 5

Round 2:

1 v 4
2 v 3
5 v 8
6 v 7

Round 3:

1 v 2
3 v 5
4 v 6

At this point, we have the following rankings:

1: 3-0
2: 2-1
3: 2-1
4: 2-1
5-8: OUT

Round 4:

1 v 3
2 v 4

At this point we have the following rankings (assuming 2 def. 4):

1: 4-0 or 3-1
2: 3-1
3: 3-1 or OUT
4-8: OUT

Thus,
Round 5:

1 v 2
3 v B

In this case, the sixth and final round would be 1 v 3

OR

1 v 2

In this case, the sixth and final round would occur if 2 def. 1 in Round 5.

Not that an extra round would likely make or break the system, but I just wanted to point it out. Also, it is worth noting that the first seed/winner could potentially play the same person three times out of six rounds...which is pretty intense.

Master KChief · « **Reply #103 on:** April 26, 2013, 02:38:59 PM »

I forget, is there a reason we would do double elim instead of single elim for top cut?

Professoralstad · « **Reply #104 on:** April 26, 2013, 03:41:49 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on April 26, 2013, 02:38:59 PM

I forget, is there a reason we would do double elim instead of single elim for top cut?

I think the reasoning was that it is a compromise between the the current system (where there is no top cut, which is the least ideal solution for determining a true winner according to those that have proposed this system) and best of three single elimiation, which is the most ideal solution for determining a true winner (but would last up to three more rounds than double elimination).

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #105 on:** April 30, 2013, 06:25:01 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on April 26, 2013, 02:38:59 PM

I forget, is there a reason we would do double elim instead of single elim for top cut?

It allows for people to feel better about a luck based draw engine in the game without sacrificing the whole system.

Here's the timing I'm thinking:

10 am - 1230 pm rounds 1-3
130 - 500 - rounds 4-7

No break:
Top 8 cut, double elimination beginning at 515, lasting til 10ish.

That's later than typically swiss for only the top 4 players or so (considering we usually finish at 9). Obviously, you could buy some time by starting at 9 or by using single elimination (which cuts 3 rounds out of the mix, and which I am personally in favor of), or by cutting one swiss round (6 should be enough to settle a single undefeated based on recent attendance).

For reference,

Double elim is 6 (or 7) rounds with a top 8
Single would be 3

Double elimination would give the "winner" if it were single elimination a 2 round bye.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #106 on:** April 30, 2013, 06:58:09 PM »

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on April 30, 2013, 06:25:01 PM

or by cutting one swiss round (6 should be enough to settle a single undefeated based on recent attendance).

For reference,

Double elim is 6 (or 7) rounds with a top 8
Single would be 3

Double elimination would give the "winner" if it were single elimination a 2 round bye.

I don't recall the exact number, but I thought there were ~67 people for T1-2P last year. And I would expect a larger number this year, since the NE should attract more players. I would be surprised if we didn't have more than 64 people for T1-2P this year (especially if NE playgroups grow after the release of the new starters).

Also, I'm pretty sure double elim is 5 or 6 rounds...I'm not sure how it could possibly be 7...

I can't see any scenario where anyone wants to play 13 rounds of tournament Redemption in a single day. If double elimination top cut is the way to go, I would suggest letting the final round (or 2, if necessary) occur the following day. Since there will only be 2-3 people involved, it shouldn't be too difficult to get them going a bit earlier. With 7 Swiss rounds, and 4 top cut rounds on day one, that would only equate to one extra round for the top eight than usual on Friday. Not to mention the fact that top cut rounds will be much easier to organize with fewer people, and they probably will be less likely to go full time.

I think the pinnacle of the Top Cut experience would be the final 1 or 2 rounds on the following day. Starting an hour earlier than usual on Saturday and allowing people to watch the live feed from a different room would be pretty awesome.

MrMiYoda · « **Reply #107 on:** April 30, 2013, 08:04:44 PM »

Please kindly bear in mind that we are not planning to extend the traditional planned timing for the T1 2P event. If you guys can assure me that all the rounds will be done by 8pm, then you are in good shape with your plans for at least 12 rounds. Else, you have no choice but to design the method where the day ends at 8pm max. The reasons are obvious.

Carry on. May the Spirit guide one and all who are heroically involved in this plan.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #108 on:** April 30, 2013, 08:33:00 PM »

Yeah, I figured as much Roy. That's why I support single elimination

Red · « **Reply #109 on:** April 30, 2013, 08:33:56 PM »

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on April 30, 2013, 08:33:00 PM

Yeah, I figured as much Roy. That's why I support single elimination

with a best of three final?

Mr.McGroovy · « **Reply #110 on:** May 01, 2013, 01:30:06 AM »

Quote from: Red on April 30, 2013, 08:33:56 PM

Quote from: Alex_Olijar on April 30, 2013, 08:33:00 PM
Yeah, I figured as much Roy. That's why I support single elimination
with a best of three final?

Just thought I'd throw my 2 cents in -

I love this idea, especially if it is streamed, it would be really fun for the rest of the players. It doesn't matter if you are part of the cut now, you feel like your playing just watching.

also, double elimination seems to be trying to compensate for the luck that is naturally part of the game. If you've made it to the cut you have done well, but there shouldn't be any cushion if you lose. If you get a bad draw its a bad draw, so goes Redemption.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #111 on:** May 01, 2013, 03:40:19 AM »

I agree with Roy, that we should NOT extend any Nats event over onto a 2nd day. There are some people who are unable to be at Nats for all 3 days, and you would hate to have someone who was unable to participate on Sat for some reason have to forfeit after getting all the way to the final 4 or 2.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #112 on:** May 01, 2013, 11:04:29 AM »

Quote from: ReyZen on April 30, 2013, 08:04:44 PM

Please kindly bear in mind that we are not planning to extend the traditional planned timing for the T1 2P event. If you guys can assure me that all the rounds will be done by 8pm, then you are in good shape with your plans for at least 12 rounds. Else, you have no choice but to design the method where the day ends at 8pm max. The reasons are obvious.

Carry on. May the Spirit guide one and all who are heroically involved in this plan.

In that case, I think double elimination is eliminated as an option. It might be possible to squeeze in an extra round or two within the scheduled time (due to less in between time for the last few rounds), but three would be quite a stretch. Single elim with a best of three final would probably be possible. I would envision a schedule something like this:

Rd 1: 9-945 AM
Rd 2: 10-1045 AM
Rd 3: 11-1145 AM
Break: 1145 AM-1245 PM
Rd 4: 1245-130 PM
Rd 5: 145-230 PM
Rd 6: 245-330 PM
Rd 7: 345-430 PM
QF: 440-525 PM
SF: 530-615 PM
FR1: 620-705 PM
FR2: 710-755 PM
FR3: 800-845 PM

That way, if the final round only goes to 2 rounds, it is done for sure by 8. It is likely that if it goes to three rounds, the first two rounds won't have taken the full 45 minutes, so it's probable that the tournament would really end by 815-830, or sooner. I just don't see anyway there could be time for a sixth round, but it's bound to happen that it would be needed if we go the double elim route.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #113 on:** May 01, 2013, 11:27:46 AM »

No supper break?

Professoralstad · « **Reply #114 on:** May 01, 2013, 11:47:13 AM »

Quote from: Westy on May 01, 2013, 11:27:46 AM

No supper break?

For everyone but the top eight, they can eat after Rd 7. The top eight should be able to get snacks or something between rounds. It would be great if there was time for another break, but I just don't see where there could be, unless the tournament started earlier (and you and I have been to enough Nats to know that won't happen).

Red · « **Reply #115 on:** May 01, 2013, 11:52:26 AM »

Quote from: Professoralstad on May 01, 2013, 11:04:29 AM

Quote from: ReyZen on April 30, 2013, 08:04:44 PM
Please kindly bear in mind that we are not planning to extend the traditional planned timing for the T1 2P event. If you guys can assure me that all the rounds will be done by 8pm, then you are in good shape with your plans for at least 12 rounds. Else, you have no choice but to design the method where the day ends at 8pm max. The reasons are obvious.

Carry on. May the Spirit guide one and all who are heroically involved in this plan.

In that case, I think double elimination is eliminated as an option. It might be possible to squeeze in an extra round or two within the scheduled time (due to less in between time for the last few rounds), but three would be quite a stretch. Single elim with a best of three final would probably be possible. I would envision a schedule something like this:

Rd 1: 9-945 AM
Rd 2: 10-1045 AM
Rd 3: 11-1145 AM
Break: 1145 AM-1245 PM
Rd 4: 1245-130 PM
Rd 5: 145-230 PM
Rd 6: 245-330 PM
Rd 7: 345-430 PM
QF: 440-525 PM
SF: 530-615 PM
FR1: 620-705 PM
FR2: 710-755 PM
FR3: 800-845 PM

That way, if the final round only goes to 2 rounds, it is done for sure by 8. It is likely that if it goes to three rounds, the first two rounds won't have taken the full 45 minutes, so it's probable that the tournament would really end by 815-830, or sooner. I just don't see anyway there could be time for a sixth round, but it's bound to happen that it would be needed if we go the double elim route.

This is the best way to do it.

MrMiYoda · « **Reply #116 on:** May 17, 2013, 07:53:35 PM »

To Alex and the "O-Plan Top Cut" team:

Please let me know if and when you wish to push through with a final proposal with at least an 80% confidence that it will work for both finalists and players who will be disqualified.

No big hurry, but the sooner the better so that T1 2P players can start determining their battle strategies.

Thanks and Godbless.

Peace.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #117 on:** May 17, 2013, 08:22:33 PM »

I can PM how it should work in my opinion based on this thread. This thread was mostly to try to appease everyone with the procedure of top cut but that's not going to happen anyway.

Chris · « **Reply #118 on:** May 18, 2013, 08:50:32 PM »

I think one more chance to debate it and come to a consensus should be applied first. Maybe we can just come up with options and have people vote?

Chris · « **Reply #119 on:** May 18, 2013, 09:34:44 PM »

I just reread this thread, and I believe that a top 16 is the best option. I agree with Westy; the more inclusive top cut can be, the better. I was originally completely and totally against byes, but I'm starting to think that byes might be the best way to solve the inherent problem with single game top cuts: one bad draw can kill off the players who otherwise performed the best, and that's not fair. Thus, I propose the following: 16 Top Cut, and 1st and 2nd get a bye. Seeding proceeds as normal otherwise. What are the serious objections to byes here? It provides a tangible benefit beyond something that can be exploited by an unlucky draw.

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #120 on:** May 18, 2013, 09:39:31 PM »

One thought I had is that the rest of the field could play for third place and those who made top cut would just play for first and second. That way the others would have something to play for. The only issue with that is that there would be players who performed better than third place but did not place,not sure if that's a big deal though because top cut is a pretty high honor in and of itself.

Ken4Christ4ever · « **Reply #121 on:** May 18, 2013, 09:47:02 PM »

Quote from: TheHobbit on May 18, 2013, 09:39:31 PM

One thought I had is that the rest of the field could play for third place and those who made top cut would just play for first and second. That way the others would have something to play for. The only issue with that is that there would be players who performed better than third place but did not place,not sure if that's a big deal though because top cut is a pretty high honor in and of itself.

Then what is the point of doing top cut rather than regular play?

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #122 on:** May 18, 2013, 09:48:24 PM »

So you can get a more accurate winner.

Chris · « **Reply #123 on:** May 18, 2013, 09:54:22 PM »

I'm not necessarily opposed to some kind of minor "best of non-Top Cut" prize or acknowledgement, but it is not fair that someone who performed worse than at least 6 people in the field should get 3rd Place.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #124 on:** May 18, 2013, 10:23:58 PM »

Honestly, I like double elimination with top 8 after 7 rounds. I still don't mind top 14 with top 2 getting byes (So TC2 would be 8 person) after 6. Both have the same amount of rounds. Double elim helps the best of the top 8 win, while top 14 allows more people (who may have been hit early with a unfortunate draw or pairing) have a chance to win. I think there's pros and cons to each. Top 14 allows for a best of 3 final (1:45 time limit, scooping [forfeiting a game] allowed). I'm still partial to a larger cut and it'll allow us to finish quicker than double elim (read: by

while still allowing a competitive nature. More possible for somebody to lose early, but the worst the winner can do is 4-1 against the top 14, but then they would have to get in the top 2 of Swiss, which is impressive enough on it's own after 6 rounds.

The more I think about it, the more I like Top 14 after 6. It rewards Swiss players and allows for a best of 3 game, not to mention being a more inclusive cut.

News:

Author Topic: Official Nationals Top Cut Rules - please provide input (Read 24979 times)

Warrior_Monk

Chris

Chris

TheHobbit13

TheHobbit13

Chris

Warrior_Monk