Machine Politics vs L'Équipe, August 2010. Photo by Steph Simcox
Swiss Rounds - lessons learned at Midwests in COMO
I'll explain a little about how I did the swiss rounds on Saturday, and we can talk about what we did right/wrong to help in future tourneys...
The teams were split into AM and PM sessions. 43 teams meant 22 in the AM 21 in the PM. Pre-rankings were looked over and adjusted, then the groups were split with a few things in mind: Similar experience levels, and location. For example, I split the "A" teams first with location in mind (ie: Beaver / Hot Sauce both A from MKE) then the "C" teams then the "B" teams...
I wrote up some software to help me determine what matchups to play. First round was done randomly, except I didn't play an A team vs a C team. (This might have been a mistake: might be better to let a C team loose first round and play another looser second round)
After each game, the final score was entered in, and a number of results were available imediately:
The main section was a ranking of teams after each round - It included the results from all the games up till that point, wins -losses, ties, points scored, -points against
Another section let me look at an entire round at a time
Clicking on the name of a team let me see their results, which helped in making sure two teams didn't play eachother twice...
Because results were calculated after every game, I could pre-select the first few games in the next round while the current was still playing. This ensured there was no loss of time between rounds. It worked out pretty well, there were very few breaks in play, and the whole round was mapped out by the time the first game was done.
To deal with the two courts, I kept the teams at each court on the same court for round one and two. This didn't mess up the matchups significantly since it was the first two rounds. After those two rounds I scrambled to get the next rounds written out as quickly as possible, and announced which teams had to switch courts as soon as i could. Games that involved two teams that were staying on the same court were played first to reduce delays
In the PM session, there were an odd number of teams. To ensure every team played 4 games, I gave one team a "bye" in round 1, then had them play two games in round 2. I would play these two games near the beginning and end of the round so they could rest up. I did the same with a different team - bye in round 3, two games in round 4.
( 20 teams = 10 games, 21 = 10 games + 1 team. x 2 rounds = 20 games + 2 teams = 21 games, each team playing 2 )
There were some rounds that had a good number of 4-0, 5-0 results. Not sure if that is inevitable with so many different teams, or that could have been avoided. I'm thinking not - while it'd be nice to have competitive games all the time, it's just not possible with such a variety of skill levels. there just aren't that many teams that can keep up with the top 5 or 6 teams. the teams that can keep up go on to shut out the bottom 1/3 teams...
all right, thats good for now. shoot me questions and comments and lets see if we can't tweak the formula to perfection