Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: A Few Rulings  (Read 1854 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7092
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9388
    • View Profile
A Few Rulings
« on: April 17, 2014, 12:15:27 pm »

In the interest of transparency, I need to make a couple of public rulings.  There are a bunch of rulings that have happened behind the scenes, most of which were simple "those are the rules, them's the breaks" but some of which had more finesse to them (allowing players who would otherwise have both been dropped to take a DD for one round then play each other in the next round being somewhat common).  However, most have no bearing on the final playoffs.  What I'm about to transparentize* does have bearing on the final 16.  As I mentioned in another thread, some of this is certain to make some people mad, but hey, that's going to happen no matter what.

(1) Byes by Request.  For this, I think the only fair ruling is to go by what's in the rules, notwithstanding a number of other errors in the rules (which still says, for instance, that the top 8 advance to playoffs rather than top 16).  Essentially I'm trying to interpret and remember my original intent, which I believe was that the player was already being penalized on some level by being forced into a draw.  Looking forward, I think next GokoDom will give defaults to byes by request, as I really don't want there to be incentive to skip a round; that's why the DD adds a default.  I'm open to thoughts on this.

(2) Round 6: Marin vs. lespeutere.  Anyone paying close attention to the top players might have noticed that this round 6 match never got played.  The ruling on this was pretty agonizing; it's a reason that I was a bit late posting the Round 7 pairings.  Essentially, both players were at least partially at fault for not getting the match together, but it was clear that Marin was more at fault.  (I should become a car insurance adjuster or something.)  There was no clear ruling; giving both players a DD, or giving lespeutere a WD and Marin an LD (without removing him from the tournament were both valid.

However, giving both of them a DD would have removed both from contention for the top 16; awarding the WD/LD left lespeutere with a chance at the playoffs.  At the time, I told him that he would need a win (total 11) and not a draw (total 10) to advance, based on treating his prior BR as a default.  Of course, my ruling above suddenly changes that--and of course, his final match ended in a draw.  So I have to make an extra ruling.

Normally a WD does not carry a penalty; then again, normally a WD is because the other player has disappeared, not because I've ruled to award a player a WD despite him being, most definitely, partly at fault.  I'm now going to rule that this special accommodation, which was made in the interest of fairness but also in the interest of having the best players in the playoffs, gives lespeutere a default as though he had earned a DD, but was worth 2 points as if it were a WD.  This conforms to my previous advice to him that he would need a win to advance.

This ruling affects various players:

lespeutere moves to the bottom of the 10 point players, eliminating him from the playoffs.

soulnet and jsh357 do not move to the bottom of their respective score totals, though this technically doesn't affect jsh357 as he had 11 points total.

Lekkit and WalrusMcFishSr have low enough tiebreaker scores that they cannot finish higher than soulnet, who is 16th using the above rankings.  I'd really like you to still finish your match though, as it could actually change the seeding in the playoffs!

The final list of qualifiers is therefore:

Code: [Select]
ragingduckd 12068050.2029
Monsieur X 12061054.2337
SheCantSayNo 12058050.288
michaeljb 12049048.2724
-Stef-        11061050.2651
Smartie        11052039.2586
jsh357        11049042.2648
JOG        10063044.2428
secret tunnel 10062041.2836
GeoLib        10059042.2222
Markowkette 10058050.105
DG        10058040.2025
AdamH        10056040.2483
faust        10056038.2717
Titandrake 10055039.1666
soulnet        10054042.1924

Note that this is not the final seeding order.

*It's a word now, OK?
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.


  • 2011 Swedish Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1253
  • Shuffle iT Username: Lekkit
  • Respect: +674
    • View Profile
Re: A Few Rulings
« Reply #1 on: April 17, 2014, 12:51:43 pm »

I obviously can't speak for WalrusMcFishSr, but if I'm eliminated due to a thing like this, I'll be disappointed that I can't make it to the playoffs. But I certainly don't blame you for it. Had I won one of the games I lost, I would've had the chance to advance. Tiebreakers are there to break ties. I tied. It's pretty simple. Although I must admit that I don't really get how they work at all. I just look at lists and see that someone else had better or worse tiebreakers.

Which brings me to my next point. I think this tournament has been run very smoothly. And 126 players is a lot for a guy to handle. I've had a blast playing, and that's why I entered. ;)


  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1750
    • View Profile
Re: A Few Rulings
« Reply #2 on: April 17, 2014, 03:48:38 pm »

I said it on another thread, but I will repeat it here: I would give byes by request in the first few rounds (3 or 4 maybe) just a regular tie, since they are bad enough for a player aiming for the playoffs (they gives less than the average score per match you need, and also a bad tiebreaking score). I would give defaults to byes by request on the later matches, to encourage playing in the cases when a tie is already a good enough result for you. I would maybe disallow byes by request in the last 2 (instead of 1) rounds of swiss.

Regarding pairings: Swiss into playoffs is strange, because in the last few rounds, it actively pairs up people which would be helped with a tie. I would like to avoid this somehow, although maybe it complicates things too much. Maybe giving 3 points to wins instead of 2 would be a good idea? I do not know if Swiss requires the game to be zero-sum. This also leaves players in contention for playoffs longer, and spreads the range of scores a bit, so that tie-breakers would be used less. Also, maybe it gives DD and BR the right to not receive a default, since the player or players tying are already losing 0.5 point each (somehow).


  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 213
  • Respect: +217
    • View Profile
Re: A Few Rulings
« Reply #3 on: April 17, 2014, 04:08:07 pm »

i actually like the overall system and i think we can trust f.ds players to not cheat with their last round result
if it can enable both players to make the playoffs. I really don't  like the idea to punish tie games compared to losses/wins.
The ruling regarding draw by defaults or bye by requests may leave space open for further discussion though.
Maybe it should be changed for future turnaments?

For now i really only have to say that i am impressed by how well Kirian is handling all the issues and the coordination work.
Thank you, you are doing an awsome job :)
Pages: [1]

Page created in 0.071 seconds with 20 queries.