Swiss Champs 2024

Tournies Upcoming Tournaments
#42

Thanks for all your inputs, opinions and calculations.
Regarding the orga stuff, we’ll be fine with 30mins or 2.5h between games, as the orga team plays in different teams and thus there should always be someone who’s not playing.

It’s more important to have fair (legitimate ranking) and fun (reasonable waiting time) swiss champs.

I thinks that the two-group solution is only appropriate if the two groups mix at some point. Otherwise, in my opinion, there will be a bias due to the randomness of the group distribution (what Elena said: “teams who should play each other won’t”).
That’s why I would strongly recommend the solutions 1 or 3 in the excel sheet, where we’d have 4 SR in two random groups, followed by 2 swiss rounds in two resulting groups (“Top 6 / Bottom 8”).
Regarding the time we can still decide spontaneously if it will be followed by a SE top 14 / top 8 / top 4 / …

As the decision should not just be taken by the orga team, I’d suggest to make a little poll in the clubs to get the most convenient solution for all players. Let’s try to get as many answers as possible until next sunday.

PROPOSAL 1:

  • Two random groups ( 6 and 8 teams) play 4 swiss rounds
  • According to the global ranking, the two groups will be mixed and split up again into a Top6 and a Bottom8 group. These groups will play two swiss rounds again
  • After these 6 rounds, a single elimination will be played (goal: all 14 teams play the single elimination)

(PROs: short waiting time between games, ranking seems good, min 7 games per team, “adrenaline games” from SE;
CONs: little less legitimate ranking than with one big group, randomness of the two groups)

PROPOSAL 2:

  • Two random groups ( 6 and 8 teams) play 4 swiss rounds
  • According to the global ranking, the two groups will be mixed and split up again into a Top8 and a Bottom6 group. These groups will play three swiss rounds again
    Top 4 will play a single elimination

(PROs: short waiting time between games, ranking seems good, min 7 games per team, everyone has +/-2 the same number of games
CONs: little less legitimate ranking than with one big group, randomness of the two groups, less adrenaline because only few will play alimination games)

PROPOSAL 3:

  • All 14 teams play 6 swiss rounds as one big group
  • Followed by a single elimination of the 14 teams (can be split up into Top8 slayer/ Bottom 6 challenger)

(PROs: precise ranking and everyone got to play elimination games;
CONs: very long waiting time between games (2.5h average))

PROPOSAL 4:

  • All 14 teams play 7 swiss rounds as one big group
  • Top4 play a single elimination

(PROs: precise ranking, everyone has +/- 2 the same number of games;
CON: Very long waiting time between games (2.5h average))

Do you agree to vote on these options?
Even though a majority in this discussion already stated out that they prefer the 2-group solution, I still wish to integrate the one-group solution in the poll. This allows all participating players to give their opinion.
I hope my 4 proposals reflect more or less what was discussed above. Feel free to correct me. If it seems good to you, say so and we can start the poll as soon as possible

5 Likes
#43

I like to idea of two groups, but I think they should be seeded as much a we can to get better ranking.

One big group is madness. Tourneys that plays 3v3 with 16 teams are already crazy boring, add 4 minutes to each game and (even with 14 teams) and it become even worst.

2 Likes
#44

@uolmo It’s not + 4 minutes it’s + 6 min per game (12 vs 18)

@Mamar it’s not clear on my sheet but groups should be seeded as much as we can. Past years when we use two groups (or more groups, 2021 was 3 groups if I recall well) we always seeded manually the groups, it’s not perfect but better than pure randomness.

1 Like
#45

Totally agree with you @coolquentin . We need to level the groups and more if we aren’t able to have a double elimination that it’s a way rectify an unlucky results.

3 Likes
#46

I’ve added your proposals to the excel sheet. This way we coud see how the planning is affected by each.
I’ve added a Proposal 5 (which is more or less the Variant 3).

I also made a version of the sheet that you can edit to play with the values :

Optimisation :
18 min per game is great, i think it’s how the euro / world was played.
But 16min (or 17) could work too and you will save 1h per day.
I’d suggest to have (or keep) rule that says that +5 goals difference ends the game.
Having winning team goal reffing etc, etc.

I think it’s important to keep in mind that usually not everything works according to the plan and a tournament aimed to finish around 18:00 will likely finish around 19:00. A proposal that aim to finish at 19:30 could very likely finish around 21:00 (worst case scenario).

It’s why my personal preference is the Proposal 5 with your proposal that consist of being able to add more teams into the Single Elimination if there’s time while the default is SE 8 teams and finish around 17:00
SE 10 teams will finish around 18:00 etc, etc.

If you need help to seed the group i think there’s plenty of knowledge around here to help you.
Of course there’s news teams and mixed ones but making group as much as even as possible is doable and will be better than pure randomness.

BTW : this is great, it shows that maybe we need to plan a two courts tournament to have perfect Swiss champs in the future <3

5 Likes
#47

Pololove from St. Gallen is still looking for a Flinta person. :face_with_monocle:
May anyone has the number from @Dev ?

Thx for your help.:pray:

3 Likes
#49

What should we do if Pololove don’t find a 4th player:

  • not allowed to participate?
  • FLINTA players from other teams will be their sub?

or do you have other suggestions?

#50

From what I asked around, I’ve had the following general feedback:

  • Make two groups to reduce the waiting time
  • Everybody wants to play elimination games
  • Make a separate challenger/slayer elimination

Did you guys also got some feedback?

I’ve added the following proposal to the sheet, which seems to work regarding the timing:

  • 6 swiss rounds with 16 min games
  • 14 teams single elimination with 18 min games

What do you think to the different game lengths? It probably allows us to have at the same time enough group games and a single elimination for everyone.

Finally I think there’s a logical problem with the seeding by hand:
If we seed the two groups by hand, we create a Top and Bottom group. After 4 SR we’ll have a global ranking which was created in partially different conditions.
A likely outcome is that there will be an intermediate level team which is last from the top group → last overall
At the same time there will be an intermediate level team which will finish first of the bottom group → first overall.
They will be then accorded to the new Top/Bottom groups, where they have the chance to balance out their “biased ranking”. However, in just two rounds, the bias will still be there, and for the intermediate level team from the initial top group it will be impossible to get close to the ranking where they should probably be.

Therefore I suggest:

  • play 3+3 games in the two different groups, and not 4 and 2 as it was planned before
  • I’m not sure if it is better to shuffle the teams or to seed them by hand initially. Some kind of bias will be there anyways.

If we decide to seed the teams by hand, I’ll try to do so and send my proposal to 2-3 reps for approvement/correction. I hope you guys understand that I don’t like to judge the level of my friends all openly on poloverse, which is why I’d prefer the half-secred way.

In the end it is ok that there is some luck or bad luck in the seeding, there always is. I just try to keep it small, but it is part of the game in the end.

#51

Most definitely this.

1 Like
#52

I would say we sub!

1 Like
#53
  • About the manually seeding problem, I don’t get it : By “by hand” i meant you rank the 14 teams as much as you can :
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    12
    13
    14

Then you seed the two groups A and B like that (for exemple) :

A:
1,3,5,7,9,11,13,14
B:
2,4,6,8,10,12

  • In proposal #6 I don’t get why you give more rounds to the 8 teams groups, 4 rounds is way enough for 8 teams (but its the result of your former reflexion about seeding group by hand if i understand right)

  • About the game length : i’d stay the same for the whole tournament, if it’s 16 it should be 16 until the end.
    16min is the logical original 12min + 1 player = 16min. It’s fine, not perfect but fine.

About slayer and challenger SE : why not. It will be like a SE for top 4 or 6 and a SE for bottom 8 or 10 ?

#54

whaa amazing, I didn’t get that before! I missunderstood the way of seeding.
The way you showed here seems very good to me, sorry for the confusion. In this way I agree again to make 4+2 rounds as previously discussed.

I made a shortcut on the rounds, sorry. It was basically my personal notes to simulate a beginning of round 5 on saturday evening, which is very likely to happen with 16min games. But yeah, also for solution 6, both groups should have 4 rounds followed by 2 more rounds of the new groups.

Finally, if we play 16min games the timing works well then. But let’s at least have longer games in semi finals and finals, both challenger and slayer bracket.

Yeah Slayer Top8 and challenger bottom6 probably, but we can decide on that detail later.

1 Like
#55

I’d say preferably no :) but it’s only my opinion.
With 4 players some teams have a workflow about switching player etc. and I don’t see why game length should differ during the day.

Do you want to vote about the format ? Just make a poll here with X proposal to vote on ?

#56

Just a suggestion: would it be possible (and appreciated) for the flintas to play a flinta final before or after the mixed final.
Some kind of the following: the flinta Players of the best two ranked Teams choose co-players to fill up a 3 / 4 player team.
Would allow to play Flintas with and against flintas and to see how it is.
One argument for Mixed mandatory was no euros - so lets test so new stuff.
So - why not test something else…

1 Like
#57

Hi Lukas! This could be an interesting idea.
It will probably depend on two practical things:

  • There needs to be enough time left to do this Flinta final
  • The concerned “team captains” need to want this to happen. I could also imagine that they are too tired and want to save their energy for the general final.

I’d suggest that we keep the idea in mind and that Flinta players can vote on it this weekend. Would this be ok for you?

1 Like
#58

Alright then. But from all the feedback that I had, some things already seem to be decided to me:

  • Two groups
  • Group rounds will be split up into two phases (first seeded manually, then new Top / Bottom groups)
  • Everyone should play in the single elimination
  • The elimination should be split up into two levels

For me it is just the question about the game duration now, which decides the number of rounds. I see these two possible options:

  • 18min games // 3 Rounds in first groups → 2 more rounds in Top8 / Bottom 6 groups → Single elimination Top6 / Bottom8
  • 16min games // 4 Rounds in first groups → 2 more rounds in Top8 / Bottom 6 groups → Single elimination Top6 / Bottom8

0 voters

I hope this reflects what we’ve discussed so far. Feel free to answer to the poll, or to add any better propositions.

2 Likes
#59

it would be nice, but as Mario says, TIME available is the main limit. and if once it could be doable, then i d say certainly AFTER the main final, cause the main final is the main point of the event. thx for giving your time to think about these possibilities!

#60

as i see it, i d say more games before elimination is more interesting as there s an opportunity to meet 1 more team. in terms of difference of time play: in 16 min games in average its 12 min / player vs in 18min games its 13,5 min. not a big loss imo.
also, unless big mecanical or bad luck people usually do not make more that 3 changes with a team of 4.

1 Like
#61

If it’s something a majority of the concerned player wants and if we have time why not but I’d say after the main event.
Worst case there’s the Hell’s Belles in Bern in like one month.

#62

@Lara @Romain Remy joue ou pas ? Qui le remplace ?