New Orleans: round robin to double-elimination system

Cory in dc

Verified Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2012
Messages
1,462
I said I would post up some more details on how a round robin could be used to accommodate more than 32 players (up to 48) without a time crunch. I also mentioned that it would make each person play more other players in total, and more matches before anyone is eliminated. The main benefit in terms of schedule is that it removes much (not all) of the waiting that usually happens in a double-elimination bracket. Also, two single-elimination brackets have fewer matches than an equal size double-elim bracket.

Here's the basic format:

1. Form 8 round robin groups of up to 6 each.

2. The top two from each group will go to the High bracket (exactly 16) and the rest go to the Low bracket (17-32 players). Both High and Low are single-elimination brackets. There are no byes in the High bracket but there are in the Low bracket.

3. The High bracket has 60% of the money and the Low bracket has 40%. So people have an incentive to go into the High bracket. If the top 3 get paid in each bracket, that's a pretty deep payout.

4. With round robin, the matches don't have to happen in any particular order so I think this could work well with some people there on Friday day and others not till Friday night.

5. To speed it up, final spots in each round robin bracket go into pre-determined spots in the High and Low brackets. That way, we don't need to wait for the entire round robin to finish in order to have a draw and start the High and Low brackets.

6. People will have to write down ball counts for each game in order to break ties.​

The groupings in the attached show the basic idea. It's structured so that in a group of 6 players, each person would play 4 others in the group exactly two games (not a race). On the other hand, it would probably consume about 5-6 hours of playing time to get people into the High and Low brackets. I think that works as long as the High and Low single-elim brackets are races to 2 (at least in the early rounds--once a bracket is down to 8, we can check the time and decide to make it races to 3).

Everyone is guaranteed to play 5 other people before being eliminated. Players from each round robin grouping are spread out in the single-elim brackets so that nobody would re-play until the later rounds.

I am a little concerned that the round robin will take too long. We could instead have groups of 6 where everyone plays one game against 5 other people. The problem is that some players would get the break in 3 games and others would get it in just 2 games. Or it could be made so that, in each grouping, everyone plays 2 games against 3 other players instead of 4 (probably my preference).

As you can see in the attached, I have the tie-break set up as a coin flip (only a tie between 2nd and 3rd matters). That could be changed to a break/ball-in-hand run contest for the tie-break, which might be more fun.

This may be a bit over-engineered, but it may be better than double-elim for more than 32 players. Obviously, I'm not at all offended if people prefer a traditional format.

Cory



 

Attachments

Last edited:

LSJohn

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
7,757
If the top 3 get paid in each bracket, that's a pretty deep payout.
Are you saying to pay 3 people out of a possible 48? That wouldn't even be close to "deep." Top 6 would be 25% of 48, 37.5% of 32, which I think for a largely social event is appropriate.

Unless I'm misreading, one place you're saying two games, another you're saying race to two.

I don't like a coin flip into the high bracket. Break-and-run sounds fun. Would it be ball-in-hand?
 

Jeff sparks

Verified Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2015
Messages
2,929
I said I would post up some more details on how a round robin could be used to accommodate more than 32 players (up to 48) without a time crunch. I also mentioned that it would make each person play more other players in total, and more matches before anyone is eliminated. The main benefit in terms of schedule is that it removes much (not all) of the waiting that usually happens in a double-elimination bracket. Also, two single-elimination brackets have fewer matches than an equal size double-elim bracket.

Here's the basic format:

1. Form 8 round robin groups of up to 6 each.

2. The top two from each group will go to the High bracket (exactly 16) and the rest go to the Low bracket (17-32 players). Both High and Low are single-elimination brackets. There are no byes in the High bracket but there are in the Low bracket.

3. The High bracket has 60% of the money and the Low bracket has 40%. So people have an incentive to go into the High bracket. If the top 3 get paid in each bracket, that's a pretty deep payout.

4. With round robin, the matches don't have to happen in any particular order so I think this could work well with some people there on Friday day and others not till Friday night.

5. To speed it up, final spots in each round robin bracket go into pre-determined spots in the High and Low brackets. That way, we don't need to wait for the entire round robin to finish in order to have a draw and start the High and Low brackets.

6. People will have to write down ball counts for each game in order to break ties.​

The groupings in the attached show the basic idea. It's structured so that in a group of 6 players, each person would play 4 others in the group exactly two games (not a race). On the other hand, it would probably consume about 5-6 hours of playing time to get people into the High and Low brackets. I think that works as long as the High and Low brackets are races to 2 (at least in the early rounds--once a bracket is down to 8, we can check the time and decide to make it races to 3).

Everyone is guaranteed to play 5 other people before being eliminated. Players from each round robin grouping are spread out in the single-elim brackets so that nobody would re-play until the later rounds.

I am a little concerned that the round robin will take too long. We could instead have groups of 6 where everyone plays one game against 5 other people. The problem is that some players would get the break in 3 games and others would get it in just 2 games. Or it could be made so that, in each grouping, everyone plays 2 games against 3 other players instead of 4 (probably my preference).

As you can see in the attached, I have the tie-break set up as a coin flip (only a tie between 2nd and 3rd matters). That could be changed to a break/ball-in-hand run contest for the tie-break, which might be more fun.

This may be a bit over-engineered, but it may be better than double-elim for more than 32 players. Obviously, I'm not at all offended if people prefer a traditional format.

Cory



This is impressive Cory and it will definitely require your presence :) lol
I might actually be in favor of this format with 32 players also, as it seems to afford more time to match up and or socialize outside of the tournament arena. You and Dustin both have contributed great ideas and format brackets for this event, we are grateful for your input and the time you have freely donated to the pursuit of a reasonable solution.
I, like LSJohn, would prefer the ball in hand tie break method over the coin flip... Just adds more drama and sounds like fun...

Really looking forward to meeting you both as well as all the others I have not yet had the pleasure of shaking hands with...
Thanks for the help guys...:):):)
 

Cory in dc

Verified Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2012
Messages
1,462
Are you saying to pay 3 people out of a possible 48? That wouldn't even be close to "deep." Top 6 would be 25% of 48, 37.5% of 32, which I think for a largely social event is appropriate.

Unless I'm misreading, one place you're saying two games, another you're saying race to two.

I don't like a coin flip into the high bracket. Break-and-run sounds fun. Would it be ball-in-hand?
Pay top 3 in each bracket, or 6 in total--this could easily be 4 in each bracket and 8 total, of course (maybe the former with <=36 and the latter with 37+?). In the round robin, it would be *2 games* not a *race to 2* in the round robin phase--everyone plays 8 total games against 4 players and advances to a bracket on that basis (or 6 total games against 3 players if we want to conserve on time). In the single-elim brackets, it would be races to 2 for at least the first round or two.

Yes, I think the tiebreak would be break, take ball in hand anywhere on the table, and see what you can put up. I thought about a 1-ball one pocket tiebreak, but that can take a while. I think this is more exciting.

Question for John: Could you run this tournament structure?
 
Last edited:

LSJohn

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
7,757
Pay top 3 in each bracket, or 6 in total--this could easily be 4 in each bracket and 8 total, of course (maybe the former with <=36 and the latter with 37+?).
I think we should pay at least 25% of the field.

In the round robin, it would be *2 games* not a *race to 2* in the round robin phase--everyone plays 8 total games against 4 players and advances to a bracket on that basis (or 6 total games against 3 players if we want to conserve on time). In the single-elim brackets, it would be races to 2 for at least the first round or two. [/quote]

Gotcha.

Yes, I think the tiebreak would be break, take ball in hand anywhere on the table, and see what you can put up. I thought about a 1-ball one pocket tiebreak, but that can take a while. I think this is more exciting.
Good.

Question for John: Could you run this tournament structure?
Probably. :eek:

I 'm not getting my brain around this: "5. To speed it up, final spots in each round robin bracket go into pre-determined spots in the High and Low brackets." I understand the concept, but I haven't figured out the process.
 

Cory in dc

Verified Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2012
Messages
1,462
I 'm not getting my brain around this: "5. To speed it up, final spots in each round robin bracket go into pre-determined spots in the High and Low brackets." I understand the concept, but I haven't figured out the process.
See the "Destination" column in the bottom right of the RR bracket? That's a numbered spot on one of the two single elimination brackets. There is no draw in the single elim brackets. So if Groupings A and D finish ahead of the others, we know where those 12 players will go and can start up matches right away. Basically, as soon as you can put names next to each Rank in the Round Robin scoresheet, you can add names to the Low and High single elimination brackets. This is part of why I think this format will work better--it will use the tables more continuously for a longer time.

Also, if anyone in a grouping goes undefeated then once everyone else has lost 1 match the undefeated person can go straight to the assigned spot in the High bracket even if the group isn't done. (Note: with 6 players in a group and each playing 4 matches, up to two people could go undefeated.) Likewise in reverse for anyone who doesn't win any games (Looking at you here, Mitch!)

Also, ties between spots 1 and 2 don't matter, since there's no seeding, nor do ties between 3-6. You do want to be in the High bracket because there's both more money and fewer matches in total.

If a grouping only has 5 players, then "Bye" goes into the Rank 6 row and then into the corresponding spot in the Loser's bracket. I'd want to double check this, but I tried to make it so that the byes are automatically spaced out appropriately.

I'll do more careful checking and debugging if people are inclined towards this format. Let me know!

Cory
 
Last edited:

LSJohn

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
7,757
See the "Destination" column in the bottom right of the RR bracket?
Ah, OK, now I get it. Those numbers indicate the designated place on a 16 bracket for the top two, and in a 32 bracket for the other 4 (assuming 48 players.)

...can start up matches right away. Basically, as soon as you can put names next to each Rank in the Round Robin scoresheet, you can add names to the Low and High single elimination brackets. This is part of why I think this format will work better--it will use the tables more continuously for a longer time.
Yup, I see that. Cool.

Also, if anyone in a grouping goes undefeated then once everyone else has lost 1 match the undefeated person can go straight to the assigned spot in the High bracket even if the group isn't done. (Note: with 6 players in a group and each playing 4 matches, up to two people could go undefeated.) Likewise in reverse for anyone who doesn't win any games (Looking at you here, Mitch!)

Also, ties between spots 1 and 2 don't matter, since there's no seeding, nor do ties between 3-6. You do want to be in the High bracket because there's both more money and fewer matches in total.

If a grouping only has 5 players, then "Bye" goes into the Rank 6 row and then into the corresponding spot in the Loser's bracket. I'd want to double check this, but I tried to make it so that the byes are automatically spaced out appropriately.

I'll do more careful checking and debugging if people are inclined towards this format. Let me know!
You must be some kind of friggin' genius (for me that means you have over 85 IQ.) :p

I'm lettin' you know. I think we should plan to do it if we get more than 35, but stick with a modified 64- or 32-bracket with any less (but I'd be fine with just planning to do it this way no matter what.)

I'm in!
 

Disco Dave

Verified Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
817
I'm lettin' you know. I think we should plan to do it if we get more than 35,
Its very likely we'll get more than 35.

I have recorded 21 paid entries, 7 In The Mail, plus the following who said they are going to attend (but haven't sent in entry fees as of yet):

Tom Wirth
wgcp
vapros
Hardmix
Bill
FastEddieF
Gulfport Doc
Fireman KC


That's at least a total of 36 plus the following maybes:

Cory in DC
Hacker
MobileMike
Wincardone

Which would get us up to 40
 

LSJohn

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
7,757
Its very likely we'll get more than 35.

I have recorded 21 paid entries, 7 In The Mail, plus the following who said they are going to attend (but haven't sent in entry fees as of yet):

Tom Wirth
wgcp
vapros
Hardmix
Bill
FastEddieF
Gulfport Doc
Fireman KC


That's at least a total of 36 plus the following maybes:

Cory in DC
Hacker
MobileMike
Wincardone

Which would get us up to 40
That's great. That would give us 8 groups of 5 for the round robin... that would have everyone in each group playing all 4 of the the others. Everyone guaranteed to get to play at least 5 other members.

C'mon you guys...

Cory in DC
Hacker
MobileMike
Wincardone

...figure something out and get your asses down there. :)
 

Miller

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
4,148
I'm not sure how a round robin will go over. I can understand why some advocate it. But here is a scenario because you guys are driving me nuts trying to articulate it.....:sorry


So, please allow me to help......;):D


Saturday

If there are 8 groups of 5, the first round would consist of 80 matches with a total of 160 games. There are 12 tables, that would mean approximately 13 games per table. Let’s figure that this should be done in about 12 hours or 720 minutes. That gives you a time allotment of about 55 minutes a game on average where every member is guaranteed to play at least four other members. First round complete.


There are now two simultaneous brackets that will be played the next day: the winners, top 2 from each group or 16 players --and-- the losers, bottom 3 from each group or 24 players. I’m also assuming that brackets should be pulled that evening. I’d also stipulate that Cory needs to be there for this to work.


Sunday

The winners bracket of 16 would play a double elimination race to two on both sides. Let’s give them 6 tables. There are 30 matches to play. Let’s also assume that each race consists of 2.5 games (some will be 2, some will be 3). That is about 12.5 games per table. Over a period of 12 hours that gives you about 57 minutes per game on average.


The 24 losers would have to play from a 32 man bracket with 8 lucky guys getting byes, single elimination race to two. Let’s give them the other 6 tables. There are 23 matches to play. Let’s assume again that each race consists of 2.5 games (some will be 2, some will be 3). That is about 9.5 games per table. It could be reasonably anticipated that the losers would be done a couple of hours before the winners - and actually speed up their bracket.


Somebody please check my math.


The event can be capped at 40 (which coincidentally is a mathematical compromise for the 32 and 48 cap camps) and we all remain friends, nobody cancels travel arrangements, decides not come, gets all butt hurt, etc…….


You’re welcome.
:D
 

Cory in dc

Verified Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2012
Messages
1,462
Good analysis and questions. I'll add comments in red font below. Let me be clear: I have absolutely no pride on this and no problem if people prefer a more traditional structure. So I'm trying to give clarity below, not be defensive or argumentative. And I might be missing something in my calculations.

I proposed this alternative because it could be more social. Also, it will be faster than you think because it will use all 12 tables for a longer period of time. Why? You use all 12 tables until the groupings are finished. Then you have two single-elim brackets with, say, 24 (losers) and 16 (winners). These can start before the round robin is even done (see below--it would be especially helpful to get a headstart on the non-bye matches in the losers side). You use all 12 tables until the first round of 16 matches are done (16 = the 8 matches with no bye in the losers + 8 matches in the winners). Then you really start to catch up, timewise, relative to double-elim, because at that point 8 players drop out. Then you have 8 losers side matches and 4 winners side matches. Still using all 12 tables. The first time you don't make use of all 12 tables is when you drop down to 12 players.

Then you have 4 losers side and 2 winners side matches. So the first time you aren't using all the tables is when it's down to 12 players total. (We could agree in advance, for example, that if it's before 2:00 on Sunday at this point, that the winners side will go up to a race to 3. Or not.)

From the point of having 12 players total, it will finish much more quickly than double-elim. People are eliminated from the winners side, they don't go over to the losers side. There's no waiting on the winners side for the losers side to finish. This is where double-elim tourneys drag on: even when you have 12 players, you still have 5 full rounds to go. Round 1: 4 losers matches and 2 winners. Round 2. 1 winners match and 2 losers matches. Round 3. 2 losers matches; winners side guy waits in hot seat. Round 4. 1 losers side match. Round 5. Finals match. Possibly add Round 6 for true double-elim.

In contrast, with two single elims, when you're down to 12 players, you only have 3 rounds left. You have three rounds on the losers side (8 down to 4, 4 down to 2, and 2 down to 1) and two rounds on the winnners (4 down to 2 and 2 down to 1). (Side note: This disparity is why you can lengthen the winners' side races towards the end--there's one less round there.) That isn't 5 rounds, it's 3 rounds, because you only need 6 tables.


I'm not sure how a round robin will go over. I can understand why some advocate it. But here is a scenario because you guys are driving me nuts trying to articulate it.....:sorry


So, please allow me to help......;):D


Saturday

If there are 8 groups of 5, the first round would consist of 80 matches with a total of 160 games.

CORRECT, but you could have each person play 3 other players in the group, not 4. In fact, I suggested 3 in my initial post (your seeding would be based on 6 games). That takes it down to 12*8=96. You could also have everyone play everyone else 1 game for a total of 80 games (your seeding would be based on 4 games, which isn't totally out of line).

There are 12 tables, that would mean approximately 13 games per table. Let’s figure that this should be done in about 12 hours or 720 minutes. That gives you a time allotment of about 55 minutes a game on average where every member is guaranteed to play at least four OR THREE other members. First round complete.
55 MINUTES SEEMS LONG. COULD BE.

ALSO, with the RR format, the order of matches doesn't matter (with double-elimination you have to play the non-bye matches early or you will get stuck waiting anyway). So an important feature of this proposal is that a good number of people have said they *want* or are happy to play on Friday. Others have said they are not. So I am picturing about half the RR matches getting done on Friday. Otherwise, I agree, it may not work well. Now, you might think you could do the same with double-elim, but you can't unless you want to say "people who come on Saturday get all the byes" which is not a good idea. There's almost no point getting one quadrant of a double-elim bracket ahead of all the others--eventually the whole bracket gets stuck waiting for the slowest quadrant to catch up. It's frustrating because you get to a point where you have lots of open tables, lots of matches yet to go, but have none that you can start until the Gramps vs. Uncle Pokey match finishes. This happens in single-elim too, but it's not as bad.

There are now two simultaneous brackets that will be played the next day: the winners, top 2 from each group or 16 players --and-- the losers, bottom 3 from each group or 24 players. I’m also assuming that brackets should be pulled that evening.
Here, you're missing the direct seeding from the RRs to the two brackets--it would all be pre-determined per the earlier post and exchange with John. So, another time-saver is that bracket matches can start as soon as some RR matches are done.

I’d also stipulate that Cory needs to be there for this to work. John says he can handle it. I sure hope I can make it no matter the format.


Sunday

The winners bracket of 16 would play a double elimination race to two on both sides. No, Single Elimination. This is where you catch up on time! And everybody will have already had a good number of games and chances. Let’s give them 6 tables. There are 30 matches to play. Let’s also assume that each race consists of 2.5 games (some will be 2, some will be 3). That is about 12.5 games per table. Over a period of 12 hours that gives you about 57 minutes per game on average.


The 24 losers would have to play from a 32 man bracket with 8 lucky guys getting byes, single elimination race to two. Strictly speaking, I structured it so the byes would go to the 3rd place finisher in each grouping, so it's a bit more than luck. Let’s give them the other 6 tables. There are 23 matches to play. Let’s assume again that each race consists of 2.5 games (some will be 2, some will be 3). That is about 9.5 games per table. It could be reasonably anticipated that the losers would be done a couple of hours before the winners - and actually speed up their bracket.


Somebody please check my math.


The event can be capped at 40 (which coincidentally is a mathematical compromise for the 32 and 48 cap camps) and we all remain friends, nobody cancels travel arrangements, decides not come, gets all butt hurt, etc…….


You’re welcome.
:D
 
Top