SWMGAMERS.com Forums
http://swmgamers.com/forums/

New Tournament Tiebreaker - an idea
http://swmgamers.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=106&t=6979
Page 1 of 1

Author:  dnemiller [ Thu Jul 02, 2009 10:01 pm ]
Post subject:  New Tournament Tiebreaker - an idea

So I thought I would discuss an idea for you guys to talk over. One of the things I learned about the DCI program since the Regionals is that there is some tiebreaker problems with the software. This occurs in figuring people places in the tournament.

DCI uses record first.

Strength of Schedule 2nd

Third which shocked me to death was the letter your last name begins with.

So if you have a 5-1 record and your strength of schedule is the same. Then DCI reporting program will revert to the alphabetical order for places.

I think this is a glitch and I am proposing a a simple and easy solution.

SO here is my though process for the solution.

We track points in a game right. Someone will win the game say 150-76

or 15-10 or whatever.

So why not when you win you record your margin of victory. so If I win 150-75 I am 1-0 with 75 MOV (margin of victory points)

We let these MOV point accumulate during the tourney for any recorded wins.

Then at the end of the tournement if you have 3 people that are 5-1 and they have the exact strength of schedule instead of going to the alphabetical solution we go to MOV points

So if the tourneys would look like this

Jonnyb 5-1 84 MOV points
Aaron 5-1 143 MOV points
Lou V 5-1 81

So 2-4 places would now look like this

Bill 6-0 1st
Aaron 5-1 2nd
Jonnyb 5-1 3rd
Lou 5-1 4th


Just a thought to better the competitive game and make next year's Regionals and big conventions even better for all.

Author:  dvader831 [ Thu Jul 02, 2009 10:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: New Tournament Tiebreaker - an idea

I love it. It reminds me of the old CCG days, where your strength of win was recorded and made a difference for me once (yeah, second and not first :( )

Author:  Boba52 [ Thu Jul 02, 2009 10:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: New Tournament Tiebreaker - an idea

How does scoring work when your opponent concedes the match? Do you automatically get 150 if at the time you were 78-25? Also is 150 the max (in a 150 format obviously) say you were at 120 and you killed their Vader would you say you won 191-30 in a 150 format?

Oh yeah and my last name starts with T, so of course I think that tie breaker sucks the big one! :P

Author:  dvader831 [ Thu Jul 02, 2009 10:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: New Tournament Tiebreaker - an idea

Yeah, for concessions, having a 150 pt. margin would be a pretty big deal! But if everyone has the same chance, then I doubt it matters.
Would there be a limit? I know of someone (cough cough) who won a Regional game 180ish to nothing.

Author:  billiv15 [ Thu Jul 02, 2009 10:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: New Tournament Tiebreaker - an idea

I'm not sure of margin of victory. I am not sure it's really any less random than last name to be honest. I think I would have to give it a try. Let's do it in a Vassal tourney some time, see how it looks.

Other things I've always thought that should be used are head to head (when possible). I think it should be the third tie breaker only however. Now, in the case of a 3 way tie, where each beat each other, and had the same SOS, then you need a 4th. Or in cases where head to head did not occur.

Generally, at this point, if the answer were margin of victory, I'd be fine with it.

I think a change does need to be made, as to be honest, anything is better than last name, or who signed up first, or random.


Edit - I did some more thinking on this. I would like to see the following.
1. Record
2. SoS
3. Head to Head
4. MoV and I would count all points. Here's why. It enourages people to try to score. Even if you know you are going to lose, if you can kill that last key piece first and lose 154-151, you only lose 3pts. I would also allow people to never have a margin greater than the point total. Yes, I understand someone can win a 150 game 180-10 legitimately, but a cap would prevent abuse (even if its a very marginal concern). As far as a concession goes, your opponent automatically gets scaled up to 150 (or whatever the point total is for that tournament) and you get only what you had at that moment. So if the score were 78-30, you report 150-30. This encourages people to play it out no matter what.

Author:  StriderRe80 [ Thu Jul 02, 2009 11:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: New Tournament Tiebreaker - an idea

very interesting. I know tonight at our release even we had a 3 way time which some how i came out with a higher strength of schedule and i know it did not come down to last name since i am re and i tied with creehan and don't know brandons last name. I beat brandon, btandon beat creehan, and creehan beat me and we were all 3-1.

Author:  Lackey [ Fri Jul 03, 2009 12:01 am ]
Post subject:  Re: New Tournament Tiebreaker - an idea

StriderRe80 wrote:
very interesting. I know tonight at our release even we had a 3 way time which some how i came out with a higher strength of schedule and i know it did not come down to last name since i am re and i tied with creehan and don't know brandons last name. I beat brandon, btandon beat creehan, and creehan beat me and we were all 3-1.


There was a clear difference in SoS for our tournament though. In all of the years I have been involved in reporting events, I've only seen a couple SoS ties...I would rather see the next tiebreaker Head to Head rather than MoV though. If we can avoid recording all of the point totals, the better.

Author:  Omnus [ Fri Jul 03, 2009 12:02 am ]
Post subject:  Re: New Tournament Tiebreaker - an idea

Before we started doing dci events, we did everything by points. It really wasn't a great system at all. It got us by but not really well. The larger margin of victory usually was luck or bad luck. Such as going aginst a perfect counter to your squad and getting destroyed or vice versa. Or you had to deal with a slow slow player, so you pick off and uggie then wait. If you go against slow players you generally don't get to kill much, so there is usually a low point total for both sides. So i think going by MOV is almost the opposite of SOS because generally the hardest match was close. I won a regional game by 1 point in round 3, That guy ended up 5-1. MOV would also be affected by when a player concedes the loss.

I think we need a 3rd tie breaker (even tho my last name starts with an "a"). But i would be more for the total dci ranking for the opponents as 3rd tie breaker. It goes along with the SOS theme for dci anyway. If you played opponents who have a long history with dci and they win more games than they (in more cases than not) would be the harder opponent to beat. I by no means think that dci rankings are that accurate. Hell in WA the strong players are only barely starting to overtake the players who have been beating children for years in dci and heavy rankings because of it. But dci rankings of your opponents is alot better than alphabetical order.

Author:  TimmerB123 [ Fri Jul 03, 2009 12:43 am ]
Post subject:  Re: New Tournament Tiebreaker - an idea

Sos SHOULD be the 3rd tie-breaker.

It's absolutely ridiculous that pure head to head doesn't factor in AT ALL. You can place lower than someone who you beat, even if you have the same record. Let's say you beat them, then lose in the finals to the eventual champ and end up 3rd, since you had a few drop-outs, and they end up second.

Also - strength of schedule should consider first who you LOST TO. If you ended with a 5-1 record, and lost to a (3-3) record, vs someone else with a 5-1 record who lost to the (6-0), it doesn't matter who either of you you beat. You should have the lower stregnth of schedule, IMO. You should be held responsible for your losses, not held responsible for the bad luck of getting paired with a weak opponent or someone who dropped.

It should be:

1. Record
2. Head to head (did any 5-1's play each other? The victor moves to the top of the pile)
3. Opponents records (who you lost to only)
4. Opponents records (who you beat)
5. MoV

Author:  Fool [ Fri Jul 03, 2009 8:50 am ]
Post subject:  Re: New Tournament Tiebreaker - an idea

In my only DCI Sanctioned event, I took on the #2 player in the world, a new player and another guy with a bad ranking.

So let's say

#1
#2
Guy #3
Me

So I beat #2 and #3
#1 beats #3 and me but loses to #2
#2 beats #3 and #1

I'm thinking that I have this in the bag and I don't win. So IMO if the #40,000 guy beats 2 other guys and has the same Record as the #2 guy, he should definitely be the winner, as the #2 guy shouldn't lose. Anyways, he changed his squad which is illegal so...yeah.

I agree something should be done and support 100% dean's suggestion as I'm sure it's fair.

Author:  empirejeff [ Fri Jul 03, 2009 12:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: New Tournament Tiebreaker - an idea

I remember playing a startrek ccg tournament long time ago.

Where the first score is if you score the 100 points with in the hour timelimit, then you get 2 points. If you do not but still you are winning, then you get 1 point.

The second score is how many points you scored in the timelimit.

Author:  Gemini1179 [ Fri Jul 03, 2009 1:41 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: New Tournament Tiebreaker - an idea

+/- is a fine idea for a third tiebreaker. Makes you work harder against "lower ranked" players, and gives them more incentive to play harder as well.

Author:  Nivuahc [ Fri Jul 03, 2009 1:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: New Tournament Tiebreaker - an idea

From my understanding of the sequence of tie breakers (according to the rules listed in the Tournament Organizer's Handbook) it goes like this:

1st - Match Win Percentage (MWP):

Total Wins (3 points each) + Total Draws (1 point each ) divided by Matches Played (with .33 being the absolute minimum).

2nd - Opponents Match Win Percentage (OMWP, commonly referred to as Strength of Schedule):

The sum of all opponents MWP divided by the total number of opponents faced by each opponent.

3rd - Opponents Opponents Match Win Percentage (OOMWP):

The sum of all opponents opponents MWP divided by the total number of opponents faced by each opponents opponent. (gets pretty confusing but that's the way it's laid out in the rules)

4th - Defeated Opponents Match Win Percentage (DOMWP):

Basically the same as OMWP but divided by the total number of opponents faced by each defeated opponent.

And, for the record, keeping track of victory points is already listed as an alternative way to determine tie breakers in that same handbook.

As far as I'm concerned if a player concedes a game the winner should get the total points of the match (i.e. 150) by default.

The above can be found in
Section C: Tournament Operating Procedures
Sub-section C.4: Tiebreakers

This is the section about Victory Points:

Quote:
Victory Points
A player’s victory points are keyed during the event, after each round. Every game format using this tie breaker will offer the possibility to key in victory points at the end of each round played. These can be linked to game objectives, or any other criteria different from match points or game points, and entered in the system for each round. The system will provide a simple sort order based on the total of victory points keyed for the current round.

Summary Victory Points
A player’s victory points are keyed during the event, after each round. Every game format using this tie breaker will offer the possibility to key in victory points at the end of each round played. These can be linked to game objectives, or any other criteria different from match points or game points, and entered in the system for each round. The system will provide a simple sort order based on the total of victory points keyed for all the rounds, cumulatively.


EDIT: Link to the handbook for those that don't have it http://www.wizards.com/dci/downloads/TO ... b_5_07.pdf

Author:  TimmerB123 [ Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: New Tournament Tiebreaker - an idea

I find it appalling that Head to Head is not even considered in DCI tie-breaking.

Several people have mentioned this - so I thought it deserved it's own thread - since it is a slightly different discussion.

Go here to voice your opinion on Head to Head being a tie-breaker:
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=7011

Author:  jedispyder [ Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: New Tournament Tiebreaker - an idea

It's funny, over the weekend I came in 2nd in a tourney specifically because of the Last Name thing. Then again, for all I know I woulda been placed 2nd anyway. We all discussed how retarded it is for DCI to rule it this way, and of course the guy who came in 3rd because of his last name was a bit pissed and wanted another round...

Author:  Lackey [ Mon Jul 06, 2009 3:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: New Tournament Tiebreaker - an idea

jedispyder wrote:
It's funny, over the weekend I came in 2nd in a tourney specifically because of the Last Name thing. Then again, for all I know I woulda been placed 2nd anyway. We all discussed how retarded it is for DCI to rule it this way, and of course the guy who came in 3rd because of his last name was a bit pissed and wanted another round...


Really? I wasn't paying complete attention, but I thought the only tie in SoS was at the bottom of the list, not the top....

I would have recommended a playoff then for the top players if that was the case, but what I remember the SoS between all of you showed a clear placing until you got to about 5th-6th place.

Author:  Nivuahc [ Mon Jul 06, 2009 3:36 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: New Tournament Tiebreaker - an idea

It's not doing it by alphabetical order, it's doing it by when the person was registered for the event. Funnily, this usually works out to be in alphabetic order because the players names/DCI numbers are usually stored in the local players database (which happens to be in alphabetical order) and entered/registered for the event all at one time.

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 6 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/