2v2 Random OPEN -- let's try again.

GoHeat 3 · (This post was last modified: 10-25-2012 07:32 AM by GoHeat 3.)

I'm in!!!
GoHeat 3
GoHeat3
2v2 Fluffy #2 Big Grin

w/random
438 points

Ser Purple Wolf · (This post was last modified: 10-25-2012 07:31 AM by Ser Purple Wolf.)

Ser Purple Wolf
Ser Purple Wolf
Fluffy #2 with 302 points. [I don't play ransoms that often, but I do enjoy a good tourney Smile

]

2v2 with LLL#1 we are gifted #9 with 233 points

KMan 29 · 10-25-2012, 10:16 AM

KMan 29
KMan 29
1v1 Gifted #2 2075 points
2v2 Fluffy #71 22 points

Count me in!

aaronINdayton · (This post was last modified: 10-25-2012 11:32 PM by aaronINdayton.)

Format for this is going to be tough. Instead of pairing people against individual opponents (which may be the best way to do it,) I would try to lump people into groups of 4 or 8 and have everyone play a game with every other person as a partner once and against every other person exactly twice. When a team wins each player gets 1 point and the losing team get 0, and ties .5 as originally planned.

This is easy to do with groups of 4, but what do you do with the result? What if 3 people go 2-1 and one person goes 0-3? I can't think of a good way to progress groups of 4.

That leaves groups of 8, here's a link to someone who setup a single round tennis tournament of this style for 8 people with the pairings explained: http://www.livewild.org/tennis_combinatorics.html

Now the question is, how many groups of 8 do you have in the first round? For a 24 person tourney you have 3, so what do you do for round 2? take the top... 2 from one group and 3 from the other two? It'd be easier to have either 2 groups of 8 and take the top 4 from each, or 4 groups of 8 and take the top 2, to go to the next round which is a new 8 person pool. Then maybe do a 4 person group for the top 4 there if there isn't a clear winner after the second round. This would require exactly 16 or exactly 32 people.

This may not be the best idea, I haven't thought through the possible records this would generate and how many similar records could exist after each round.

Gf!sh · (This post was last modified: 10-26-2012 01:01 AM by Gf!sh.)

I like the idea, although i see a few problems.
Firstly, if a round-robin has seven rounds, that will require 3 maps to be played on twice and one to be played on once, which seems kinda awkward in my opinion.
Secondly, this idea would make for 14 games per round per person, which seems like a lot to me, probaly too many.

On a side note, i thought it would be a good idea to include nations in the singups, like in the World Cup, so anyone who already signed up, please provide your country name!

aaronINdayton · 10-26-2012, 02:36 AM

7 games per person in an 8 person pod 1 with each other player while simultaneously against each other player twice, I'd give each pod a map and have all games played on the same map so everything's balanced.

Gf!sh · 10-26-2012, 02:38 AM

Doesn't that get boring?

joelduque · 10-26-2012, 04:00 AM

I suggest to eliminate any team that loses for a 2v2 tourney. It may take many months (at least 6 months by guesstimate) if otherwise especially if many 2v2 pairings want to participate.

Gf!sh · 10-26-2012, 04:21 AM

I'm not sure what you mean by that... One playes 2v2 random as individual...

GoHeat 3 · 10-26-2012, 07:20 AM

(10-26-2012 12:20 AM)Gfich Wrote: I like the idea, although i see a few problems.
Firstly, if a round-robin has seven rounds, that will require 3 maps to be played on twice and one to be played on once, which seems kinda awkward in my opinion.
Secondly, this idea would make for 14 games per round per person, which seems like a lot to me, probaly too many.

On a side note, i thought it would be a good idea to include nations in the singups, like in the World Cup, so anyone who already signed up, please provide your country name!

Country name: USA Big Grin