Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2 3  All

Author Topic: IsoDom 5: Discussion Thread (MAJOR ANNOUNCEMENT IN OP)  (Read 22538 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Kirian

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7096
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9411
    • View Profile
IsoDom 5: Discussion Thread (MAJOR ANNOUNCEMENT IN OP)
« on: June 18, 2012, 08:51:37 am »
0

So, the official qualifier for nationals runs from this Sunday until next Saturday, and beyond for semis and finals.  Understanding that some people may be only able to play in the tournament or make their IsoDom match, and considering which of these is more important, I've made the following decision:

In order to allow competitors to better play in the important tournament, IsoDom deadlines are suspended until after the DS qualifier is finished.  Alas, because that qualifier runs weekend to weekend, I feel it necessary to postpone by two weeks.  That means that second round results will not be due until 09 July shudder.  If people do finish their matches, the following week's pairings will be posted anyway by Challonge.  Feel free to continue to play if you have the free time and the pairing is available.

In the case that, somehow, everyone finishes by this Sunday anyway, we'll go ahead and make 09 July the Round 3 deadline--but frankly I don't see that as likely.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2012, 02:17:54 am by Kirian »
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4381
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #1 on: June 18, 2012, 08:55:11 am »
0

So, I'm confused. It looks to me like Challonge now thinks this is three separate tournaments, and basically:
the highest ranked peeps are in A, followed by B, followed by C. But most importantly, people in A can only play people in A, people in B can only play people in B, and people in C can only lay people in C. But I'm guessing this isn't what you're intending? Am I reading it wrong?

Kirian

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7096
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9411
    • View Profile
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #2 on: June 18, 2012, 09:14:04 am »
+3

So, I'm confused. It looks to me like Challonge now thinks this is three separate tournaments, and basically:
the highest ranked peeps are in A, followed by B, followed by C. But most importantly, people in A can only play people in A, people in B can only play people in B, and people in C can only lay people in C. But I'm guessing this isn't what you're intending? Am I reading it wrong?

That is exactly correct, and it what was intended from the start if there were >48 players.  In other words, like a large chess tournament, we're running three separate mini-tournaments.  This allows lower-ranked players to play entirely against lower-ranked players, which decreases the chance of dropouts, and creates an interesting tournament for everyone.  It also means that five rounds, rather than seven, of Swiss are sufficient.

The alternative would be that all the high-ranked players (likely) win their early matches, with a very high chance that after three rounds, the tournament would have segregated itself in nearly the same manner anyway.  But that means the lower-ranked players may have little interest in continuing... leading to lots of likely dropouts.  Not a good thing!

Instead, we have one bracket full of level 38+ players (at time of inception), one of 26-37s, and one of 25 and under.  This makes each bracket, especially the top two, much more interesting, by pitting players of quite near skill levels together.
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

ednever

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 650
  • Respect: +722
    • View Profile
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #3 on: June 18, 2012, 10:21:11 am »
+4

I didn't realize that either.

Thanks for organizing Kirian, but I have to admit I'm disappointed. What I've really enjoyed about tournaments is playing in games with higher ranking players (and really paying attention in a way that I don't in casual games)

As a "level 37" it now looks like my most challenging games of the week will generally be my non-tournament games. And that the best I can hope for is "champion of the B-league"

It is what it is, but if there is any way to merge the "leagues" it would get my very strong up vote.


When I started in the first isodom I was level 26. It was only through getting my ass handed to me by people like O and dghunter in that tournament that I got to where I am now.

If people only want to play people at their own levels, can't try do that normally on iso, without tournaments?

Ed
Logged

Qvist

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2400
  • Shuffle iT Username: Qvist
  • Respect: +4085
    • View Profile
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #4 on: June 18, 2012, 10:30:31 am »
0

I didn't realize that either.

Thanks for organizing Kirian, but I have to admit I'm disappointed. What I've really enjoyed about tournaments is playing in games with higher ranking players (and really paying attention in a way that I don't in casual games)

As a "level 37" it now looks like my most challenging games of the week will generally be my non-tournament games. And that the best I can hope for is "champion of the B-league"

It is what it is, but if there is any way to merge the "leagues" it would get my very strong up vote.


When I started in the first isodom I was level 26. It was only through getting my ass handed to me by people like O and dghunter in that tournament that I got to where I am now.

If people only want to play people at their own levels, can't try do that normally on iso, without tournaments?

Ed

I didn't realize that either and totally agree with ednever. Like I described in the other thread, normally I just play and try experimental strategies and really don't care about winning (or: I care less). I like playing tournaments because it's the kind of environment I need to play competitively. Random games on isotropic don't motivate me enough.

greatexpectations

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1097
  • Respect: +1067
    • View Profile
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #5 on: June 18, 2012, 10:40:51 am »
0

either you are disappointed or someone else is.  it just isn't possible to please everyone in organizing a tournament like this, as Kirian described in his own post.

we all have the option of dropping out, organizing our own tournament, or scheduling competitive sets with other high ranked players on our own time.'

ednever you can still take your tournament seriously. it is frustrating to see you so casually dismiss the rest of us in your bracket. players in the 30's can still be solid players. just look at the level 28 RisingJaguar at the start of the DS.com tournament. and for that matter my level has been high enough to qualify for that top bracket at times, but i've dropped some due to inactivity.  id like to think i would be a formidable opponent for you.
Logged
momomoto: ...I looked at the tableau and went "Mountebank? That's for jerks."
rrenaud: Jerks win.

jsh357

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2577
  • Shuffle iT Username: jsh357
  • Respect: +4340
    • View Profile
    • JSH Gaming: Original games
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #6 on: June 18, 2012, 10:50:04 am »
+1

Agree w/greatexpectations

I actually prefer the tournament to be organized this way (Blowouts are boring and this reduces the chance of one; or maybe I'm just saying that because it's happened to me in all but one Iso tournament I've entered...) though I may be in the minority. 

And also for the record, I lost my first match to someone 7 levels below me (I was l36) so don't claim to be the big fish until you've eaten all the minnows.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2012, 10:52:38 am by jsh357 »
Logged
Join the Dominion community Discord channel! Chat in text and voice; enter dumb tournaments; spy on top players!

https://discord.gg/2rDpJ4N

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #7 on: June 18, 2012, 10:59:50 am »
+1

I don't mean to take this argument further, as well, but I would like to say that if you didn't want the tournament set up this way you probably should've read the original post more carefully and asked about it in the sign-up thread. At this point, it doesn't matter how disappointed you are in the format, it can always be set up differently in future tournaments. A round in really isn't the time to argue about format.
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4381
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #8 on: June 18, 2012, 11:10:24 am »
0

I don't mean to take this argument further, as well, but I would like to say that if you didn't want the tournament set up this way you probably should've read the original post more carefully and asked about it in the sign-up thread. At this point, it doesn't matter how disappointed you are in the format, it can always be set up differently in future tournaments. A round in really isn't the time to argue about format.
To be fair, this three bracket structure wasn't hinted at until 8th June, explained in much detail at all until 9th June, and the tournament started on... 9th June. Whereas the signups started on... 25th May. There also wasn't any discussion of the new format. I don't know that these people really saw the change, which happened after they signed up, and really basically no evidence that people liked or agreed with the decision.
Now, to be fair to the other side, there had been a good deal of kicking around the idea of having two tournaments rather than just one if enough people signed up.
Finally, a comment about cutoffs seeming arbitrary, so dropping them, read to ME as if Kirian was implying there would just be one tournament. Which, together with the quickness of the posting of the format to posting the tourney start, (and perhaps me not being in the tournament) led to me not realizing this stuff until this morning. I probably would have asked when I saw the brackets prior to the first round, were I playing.

ednever

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 650
  • Respect: +722
    • View Profile
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #9 on: June 18, 2012, 11:13:13 am »
0

Let me jump back in before I inadvertently offend anyone.

A few things:

(1) I think Kirian did a great job on the last iso tournament
(2) I think Kirian has done a great job so far in this tournament (in the face of a lot of crowd 'feedback')
(3) I think Kirian will do a great job for the rest of this tournament

Organizing these things is a lot of (unpaid) work and I absolutely support any decision Kirian makes. He can be absolute dictator taking zero feedback from everyone and I will support him 100%.


Second:

(1) I have absolutely no intention of putting down in any way shape or form someone based on their level on isotropic
(2) Furthermore, I won't even question someone's "Dominion playing ability" based on their level on isotrpoic (I've been beaten handily by people ranked 25+ below me, and from time to time when i was lower level I've beated those ranked 25+ above me - sometimes luck, but sometimes because I played better)
(3) As I've said before I got a LOT better playing these tournaments. A lot of high-ranked people under estimated me (I jumped 3 levels in the one-day tournament if I remember right). How could I ever think 'poorly' of a level 26 (or 31 or whatever) when I was level 26 two months ago.


Finally,

(1) If nothing changes I have no doubt I will enjoy this tournament - just as when I play on isotropic (way way too much) I enjoy almost all of my games where the other player is not offensive.
(2) I would be willing to bet right now that the highest ranked player (on isotropic) will NOT be the winner of the tournament in each bracket (don't ask me to predict who will win, but odds are that the top player going in will not), and I totally expect to lose (many times) to players lower ranked than I am


Which brings me to (I guess the last part was not 'finally'),

(1) I just wanted to make sure Kirian had my opinion - to do with as he pleases - as I don't believe it was clear this was the model (It wasn't to me. It wasn't to WW. It wasn't to Qvist.)

(2) I understand not everyone will be happy (or rather 'perfectly content. I think we can all be happy. At least until they take away our logs ;) )

(3) I seem to remember in the tournament planning there was a discussion about whether players would get preferential treatment in the tournament depending on their rank (i.e., top players would get extra 'pre-wins' to account for some of the randomness of earlier rounds - I think there was a precedent in chess tournaments if I remember correctly). I think the community came out strongly against it (including Kirian).

It looks like, while that was not done 'within groups', it was done 'between groups'. As WW said, it appears that a player in A who loses all of their games comes out 'ahead' of a player in B or C who wins all of their games.

A suggestion (for Kirian to run with or ignore or whatever) would be to do something like this:
- Treat every player in A as having won two games before the start of the tournament
- Treat every player in B as having won one game and lost one game before the start of the tournament
- Treat every player in C as having lost two games before the start of the tournament

Then the players that start winning can move up the tiers and the players that start losing can move down the tiers.

Maybe a terrible idea, but its the best I have right now.

Again, I will still be happy playing a level 2 in this tournament.  And I appreciate and support everything Kirian does.

Ed
Logged

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2849
  • Respect: +1559
    • View Profile
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #10 on: June 18, 2012, 11:20:54 am »
0

I'm alright with the tournament format because I mostly see these tournaments as an opportunity for series play. That said, I agree with ednever that it's not great to be among the highest ranks of group B, because you pretty much can only underperform your ranking, and even if you win group B, it doesn't really mean anything.
Logged

Lekkit

  • 2011 Swedish Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1253
  • Shuffle iT Username: Lekkit
  • Respect: +674
    • View Profile
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #11 on: June 18, 2012, 11:26:30 am »
0

To be honest, I'm just happy there's some organized play. I think it's fun not just sitting around in the lobby waiting for automatch games.

Also, If we don't try any new tournament formats, how are we supposed to know if they work or not?

@ednever: The thing with seeded byes for the first rounds of a tournament like this is that if your'e ranked number 1, you'd get to sit out the first three (or however many byes you get) rounds and not play games. I guess a lot of people wouldn't want that since these tournaments are mainly organized casual tournaments. I guess it would be different for, say, DS Championship 2012.
Logged

ednever

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 650
  • Respect: +722
    • View Profile
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #12 on: June 18, 2012, 11:43:38 am »
0

@ednever: The thing with seeded byes for the first rounds of a tournament like this is that if your'e ranked number 1, you'd get to sit out the first three (or however many byes you get) rounds and not play games. I guess a lot of people wouldn't want that since these tournaments are mainly organized casual tournaments. I guess it would be different for, say, DS Championship 2012.

Just to clarify my suggestion (Again - it might be a terrible suggestion, but so it's understood):
I'm suggestion effectively EVERYONE sits out the first two rounds of the tournament (i.e., 'virtual rounds')

In those first two rounds everyone in group A gets 2 wins, group B 1 win and Group C 0 wins.

The result would be (I think) the seedings we see see at the start of the current tournament, but would allow for people to move up and down across the entire field.

Ed
Logged

Lekkit

  • 2011 Swedish Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1253
  • Shuffle iT Username: Lekkit
  • Respect: +674
    • View Profile
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #13 on: June 18, 2012, 11:50:18 am »
0

That would mean that a lower seeded player cannot beat a higher seeded player even if they both win all their games. That seems pretty terrible to me.
Logged

ednever

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 650
  • Respect: +722
    • View Profile
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #14 on: June 18, 2012, 11:57:52 am »
+2

They already can't.
Logged

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #15 on: June 18, 2012, 12:03:25 pm »
+1

To clarify about not understanding his original intentions, this is what it said in the original instructions:

"If there is enough interest (48 players or more), two separate tournaments will be run, split by rating, with two separate elimination rounds; the players in separate brackets will not play each other." (emphasis mine)

Now, splitting into three different brackets, as opposed to only two, WAS something that wasn't brought up until just before the tournament started, but it was pretty clear it was going to be a segregated tournament by rank for quite a while.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2012, 12:06:42 pm by zxcvbn2 »
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

-Stef-

  • 2012 & 2016 DS Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1574
  • Respect: +4419
    • View Profile
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #16 on: June 18, 2012, 12:08:37 pm »
+1

I like the format of this tournament very much as is.

I don't like playing games against someone 20 levels below me, where I sort of "have to win". I can't imagine the other player enjoying it very much either (unless, of course, he wins ;))

I've played in many many other tournaments (non-Dominion, but some other game or sport) and they were almost without exception set up like this. Based on some ranking or based on previous tournaments, everyone was seeded in a 'division'. The highest attainable goal was winning your division. Especially with sports I was always grateful for that, because there's just no fun in a beating for either player.

Maybe that's less true for dominion, because a player 20 levels lower still has a reasonable chance of winning a game. Winning a match seems unlikely though.

... it's not great to be among the highest ranks of group B, because you pretty much can only underperform your ranking, and even if you win group B, it doesn't really mean anything.

I don't agree here. I was always happy if I won my division, and it almost never was the top one (especially with sports). If nothing else - it implied that I was allowed to join a level higher next tournament. Maybe we can do something similar here?

If you end up in the top 3 of B, you're allowed to join A next time, independent of your ranking by then
(same for C -> B)

(that is, assuming tournaments like this can continue...)
Logged
Join the Dominion League!

Lekkit

  • 2011 Swedish Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1253
  • Shuffle iT Username: Lekkit
  • Respect: +674
    • View Profile
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #17 on: June 18, 2012, 12:16:12 pm »
0

They already can't.

Then I guess I've missunderstood something. The tournament structure topic says there will be cut-offs. Will there be 3 differnt cut-offs; one for each bracket, or will there be just one; the top 8 players from all of the brackets? If the latter is true then it would be like group play with people who are about the same skill as you (I know this isn't entirely true, but it's at least more true than if all were mixed toghether in one group) and then the best players from each group would advance to the elimination bracket. That sounds really good to me.

[EDIT:] As it seems I cannot read properly the above is just a suggestion for a future tournament. ;)
Logged

Watno

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2745
  • Shuffle iT Username: Watno
  • Respect: +2982
    • View Profile
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #18 on: June 18, 2012, 12:42:46 pm »
0

Im pretty sure the registration thread was syaing that people will be split according to ranking in the beginning. The only thing that was changed was that it'd be 3 groups instead of 2. If all players were in the same group, 5 rounds wouldnt be enough to get a decent 8-player cutoff i think (you wouldnt stand a chance if you lost one gameif my quick maths are right.)
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4381
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #19 on: June 18, 2012, 12:52:10 pm »
0

Im pretty sure the registration thread was syaing that people will be split according to ranking in the beginning. The only thing that was changed was that it'd be 3 groups instead of 2. If all players were in the same group, 5 rounds wouldnt be enough to get a decent 8-player cutoff i think (you wouldnt stand a chance if you lost one gameif my quick maths are right.)
Even assuming you mean match rather than game, your maths are way wrong.
Assuming no ties, 64 person tourney:
After Round
1, 32 are 1-0, 32 are 0-1
2, 16 are 2-0, 32 are 1-1, 16 are 0-2
3, 8 are 3-0, 24 are 2-1, 24 are 1-2, 8 are 0-3
4, 4 are 4-0, 16 are 3-1, 24 are 2-2, 16 are 1-3, 4 are 0-4
5, 2 are 5-0, 10 are 4-1, 20 are 3-2, 20 are 2-3, 10 are 1-4, 4 are 0-2

So, you lose one, you no longer totally control your fate. But you have a very good chance of making it anyway. It's certainly a long way from 'not standing a chance'. Though this is right if you lose 2.
Alternatively, the problem you have here is, only a third of the people even have a chance of really winning the thing.

I'm not trying to say method A>method B, just trying to spread understanding of how things work.

Watno

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2745
  • Shuffle iT Username: Watno
  • Respect: +2982
    • View Profile
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #20 on: June 18, 2012, 01:15:17 pm »
0

oops, i think i assumed 128 players and failed powers cause i was always one round too far^^
Logged

Fabian

  • 2012 Swedish Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 666
  • Respect: +542
    • View Profile
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #21 on: June 18, 2012, 01:16:58 pm »
+2

Just a quick note on the tournament format. Because of the way tie-breakers work in this tournament, losing in round 1 often does mean exactly what Watno is saying, that you're effectively out in a 64 player 5 round tournament. Losing in round 1 is a lot worse for your tie-breakers than losing round 5, as every subsequent round you'll be playing players whose records are worse on average than those who started out winning their first couple rounds and then lost round 4/5. This is a common problem/feature/annoyance in Magic tournaments too, where a similar tiebreaker system is used. You're definitely not theoretically out though after losing round 1, as the opponents you play in later rounds could theoretically end up with better records than the opponents of the guy who starts out 4-0 and losing round 5.

Personally, I'm happy with this tournament format, but I'm guessing I wouldn't be if I was in the B or C division, so I don't know if that means much.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2012, 01:22:17 pm by Fabian »
Logged

Kirian

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7096
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9411
    • View Profile
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #22 on: June 18, 2012, 01:41:43 pm »
+3

To be fair, this three bracket structure wasn't hinted at until 8th June, explained in much detail at all until 9th June, and the tournament started on... 9th June. Whereas the signups started on... 25th May.

  • There will be a maximum of 32 players in the main bracket
  • If there is enough interest (48 players or more), two separate tournaments will be run, split by rating, with two separate elimination rounds; the players in separate brackets will not play each other.

This was in my initial post in the signup thread, on 25 May.

More answers to come, wanted to get that one out of the way.

Edit:  And I see zxcvbn took care of that already for me.

--------

A few notes:

First, a tournament with 64 people couldn't reasonably last only five rounds; it would need to be a six-round Swiss tournament with probably a 16-player elimination round, adding another two weeks to the tournament.  Having multiple brackets like this is a reasonable compromise between only letting 32 people in, and still compressing the tournament to a reasonable span of time.

Second, while I understand that winning the B bracket isn't as, shall we say, prestigious as winning the A bracket, I think it's important to note that a player in the B bracket has a chance to win... well, something.  S/he will be able to claim a strong set of games versus people in the same bracket.  A level 25 would otherwise have almost no chance of winning a tournament where 40 people are higher-ranked, barring a crazy RisingJaguar situation--and consider that it's clear that was simply a case of seeding with poor information, given that RJ has now been #1 on the leaderboard at least once.

Third, I do think the "reverse" holds true, as it were, especially with multiple brackets.  The level 25 player has a much greater chance of a "comeback" when the bracket is from 25-35 than if it's 25 and up.  I don't think the top 4 or 8 are shoe-ins in any of the brackets as done here, but I think it's safe to suggest that 7 of the top 8 in a one-bracket tournament would have come from the top 20 players or so.

Finally, I want to thank people for keeping this thread nicely constructive criticism. :)  You can't please all of the people all of the time; hell, you can't even please most of the people most of the time.  But the complaints really have felt more like suggestions and ideas than "I'm going to quit in a huff!" style comments.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2012, 02:30:21 pm by Kirian »
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

Watno

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2745
  • Shuffle iT Username: Watno
  • Respect: +2982
    • View Profile
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #23 on: June 18, 2012, 01:48:26 pm »
0

Hahm i can be right even when miscalculating^^.
The largest problem i see with this format is scheduling, since you cant postpone games without delaying the whole tournament. Also i think previous Isodoms had groups separated by region to make scheduling easier, which i think is a good idea.
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4381
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: IsoDom 5: Round 2 Thread
« Reply #24 on: June 18, 2012, 02:11:46 pm »
0

To be fair, this three bracket structure wasn't hinted at until 8th June, explained in much detail at all until 9th June, and the tournament started on... 9th June. Whereas the signups started on... 25th May.

  • There will be a maximum of 32 players in the main bracket
  • If there is enough interest (48 players or more), two separate tournaments will be run, split by rating, with two separate elimination rounds; the players in separate brackets will not play each other.

This was in my initial post in the signup thread, on 25 May.

More answers to come, wanted to get that one out of the way.
TWO brackets. Three wasn't discussed until the 8th. And I at least get a pretty big tone difference. Your OP there seems more like 'oh, if we have too many, we've got to break it up, so that we can have a reasonable tournament for the number of rounds we're doing'. Which is fine. An then later it's 'oh, I think I want 3 groups for no given reason'. Which is not to say there is no reason. But you don't give one.
And in that post (reply 89), it seems very much to me that you're leaning toward two groups rather than three.
I stand by everything I said - I re-read that whole thread this morning before posting (well, not before the first reply here, but before anything else). Unfortunately,  you locked the thing (to be fair, the locking is unrelated to this issue - I'm not trying to say you had any nefarious reasons for locking it or anything like that), so now us normal-folk can't quote relevant passages without jumping a bunch of hoops.
Pages: [1] 2 3  All
 

Page created in 0.173 seconds with 20 queries.