Life In 19x19 https://lifein19x19.com/ 

Simultaneous Winandcontinue https://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=12627 
Page 1 of 1 
Author:  Elom [ Sat Jan 23, 2016 9:41 am ] 
Post subject:  Simultaneous Winandcontinue 
I've wondered about the logistics for a win and continue with six teams, and one that seemed quite interesting was to employ a simultaneous method of two brackets in which the losers of a round in each bracket swap places. So that if there were six teams in two brackets, (A,B,c) and (D,E,f), each bracket would run as two separate tournaments, except that when a team loses a match, it switches places with the losing team in the opposite bracket, and of course, both losing teams become the inactive team for that round (A,C,e) (D,F,b). It seems a bit extreme for teams to have more than 3 players, however! Lasting, how useful could it actually be as a system, to whom? Maybe it could be fun to try in a congress, but it may be a little complicated, for example... 
Author:  ez4u [ Sat Jan 23, 2016 2:27 pm ] 
Post subject:  Re: Simultaneous Winandcontinue 
Elom wrote: I've wondered about the logistics for a win and continue with six teams, and one that seemed quite interesting was to employ a simultaneous method of two brackets in which the losers of a round in each bracket swap places. So that if there were six teams in two brackets, (A,B,c) and (D,E,f), each bracket would run as two separate tournaments, except that when a team loses a match, it switches places with the losing team in the opposite bracket, and of course, both losing teams become the inactive team for that round (A,C,e) (D,F,b). It seems a bit extreme for teams to have more than 3 players, however! Lasting, how useful could it actually be as a system, to whom? Maybe it could be fun to try in a congress, but it may be a little complicated, for example... In your structure only four out of six teams play each round. What is the point of that? Why is it 'interesting' that 1/3 of the participants do nothing at any given point in time? Just play a round robin so that everyone plays all the time. The point of win and continue is as dripfeed (hat tip JF for this term), parsimonious entertainment for spectators (and sponsors). String things out over a long period of time while actually playing the minimum number of games. 
Author:  Elom [ Wed Jan 27, 2016 6:46 am ] 
Post subject:  Re: Simultaneous Winandcontinue 
ez4u wrote: Elom wrote: I've wondered about the logistics for a win and continue with six teams, and one that seemed quite interesting was to employ a simultaneous method of two brackets in which the losers of a round in each bracket swap places. So that if there were six teams in two brackets, (A,B,c) and (D,E,f), each bracket would run as two separate tournaments, except that when a team loses a match, it switches places with the losing team in the opposite bracket, and of course, both losing teams become the inactive team for that round (A,C,e) (D,F,b). It seems a bit extreme for teams to have more than 3 players, however! Lasting, how useful could it actually be as a system, to whom? Maybe it could be fun to try in a congress, but it may be a little complicated, for example... In your structure only four out of six teams play each round. What is the point of that? Why is it 'interesting' that 1/3 of the participants do nothing at any given point in time? Just play a round robin so that everyone plays all the time. The point of win and continue is as dripfeed (hat tip JF for this term), parsimonious entertainment for spectators (and sponsors). String things out over a long period of time while actually playing the minimum number of games. Hmm, I didn't think about the percentage of teams playing in a round. If it were a round robin, I guess it would be arranged in the normal 1stboard2ndboard3rdboard format. Do you mean that while a round robin can try to maximise the number of games each round (or play each game in the round separately for a similar reason to winandcontinue), and winand continue minimizes the number of games, this format is a bit like the twospace low pincer? 
Author:  ez4u [ Thu Jan 28, 2016 5:49 am ] 
Post subject:  Re: Simultaneous Winandcontinue 
Elom wrote: ez4u wrote: Elom wrote: I've wondered about the logistics for a win and continue with six teams, and one that seemed quite interesting was to employ a simultaneous method of two brackets in which the losers of a round in each bracket swap places. So that if there were six teams in two brackets, (A,B,c) and (D,E,f), each bracket would run as two separate tournaments, except that when a team loses a match, it switches places with the losing team in the opposite bracket, and of course, both losing teams become the inactive team for that round (A,C,e) (D,F,b). It seems a bit extreme for teams to have more than 3 players, however! Lasting, how useful could it actually be as a system, to whom? Maybe it could be fun to try in a congress, but it may be a little complicated, for example... In your structure only four out of six teams play each round. What is the point of that? Why is it 'interesting' that 1/3 of the participants do nothing at any given point in time? Just play a round robin so that everyone plays all the time. The point of win and continue is as dripfeed (hat tip JF for this term), parsimonious entertainment for spectators (and sponsors). String things out over a long period of time while actually playing the minimum number of games. Hmm, I didn't think about the percentage of teams playing in a round. If it were a round robin, I guess it would be arranged in the normal 1stboard2ndboard3rdboard format. Do you mean that while a round robin can try to maximise the number of games each round (or play each game in the round separately for a similar reason to winandcontinue), and winand continue minimizes the number of games, this format is a bit like the twospace low pincer? No, I don't believe that I meant that. The main thing that a win and continue format does compared to a round robin is eliminate games that are uninteresting to spectators. Games that no longer affect results may also be uninteresting to the players as well. As you noted, a round robin could be strung out on a schedule similar to a win and continue. On the other hand a win and continue can not be compacted without changes like the approach outlined in your OP. 
Page 1 of 1  All times are UTC  8 hours [ DST ] 
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ 