Discussion Rules

[acerimmer]

There seems to be a problem with the matchups after the group stage.
The #1seed is due to meet the #2 seed in the quarter finals. Surely they should meet in the final.

[stratego]

hi ace,

no - i see no problem.

the winner of a group meets a 2nd of a different group.

winner group A (a1) plays 2nd of group H (h2)
winner group B (b1) plays 2nd of group G (g2)
etc.

the winner of each match goes on and meets a winner of another match till final.

[ruben87]

[acerimmer]

The quarter finals should be:
1 v 8

5 v 4

6 v 3

7 v 2

Semi finals =

1 v 4

3 v 2

Final =

1 v 2

The top 16 pairings should have the rule that the player finishing in 2nd would go to the opposite side of the seeding tree & thus this would avoid two players meeting in the group stage and not meeting again until the final. This would mean that players @ A1,H1,E1,D1 would play someone @ G2,F2,C2,B2.
Obviously the remaining pairings would see players @ B1,C1,F1,G1 would play someone @ A2,H2,E2,D2.
The exact pairings at the top 16 stage is not important, other than this simple rule.

[ruben87]

Please read my post carefully, Ace. In my pairing the group players wont play each other until the final.

[stratego]

hmm, someone afraid to meet each other?

the group stage is good for the best 8 players - normally we could also
set the groups by random.

of course we can try to prevent a meeting of the highest ranking players.
but then we shoud also discuss the group stage.

normally we must set the players like:

01 - 02 - 03 - 04 - 05 - 06 - 07 - 08
09 - 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 etc

this is because the naked ratings of a player doesnt mean that much.
more important is the difference from 1 to 2 to 3 etc.
in the end this system will have more equal groups, because all players
have (in theorie) the same space.

in the moment we do all for the best to win the tourney.
but your choice.

group a with 1 - 16 - 17 - 32 - 33 is easy for 1
it should be: 1 - 9 - 17 - 25 - 33 at least he has one out of the top 10

stratego

[ruben87]

[stratego]

hi ruben

you must only watch the difference between the ratings.

for the 8 and all other of these groups its the same like group a.

the rating of 1 or of 2 is not important - its the gab between.

the rating say that our 1 will even beat the 2 3 and 4 so he is not the prob.
the ranking expect his win. the others in the group must have a chance.

but your choice, i can change all.

[ruben87]

[stratego]

hi ruben,

we changed it to your example. if we have a prob with that, we can change it
next tourney.

[zach21]

i agree with ruben and ace.....

group A1, plays H2
B1, G2

etc....

this is what I think, lmk if this is what it is?

[ruben87]

[acerimmer]

[stratego]

hi,

i think zach is right:

a1 - h2
e1 - d2
g1 - b2
c1 - f2

b1 - g2
f1 - c2
h1 - a2
d1 - e2

otherwise a1 is save and protected till the final, he doesnt meet b or c.
(and group stage is 1 - 16 and lower)

this one looks good and fair

@ace: the seeded system you show is only good for groups with equal strength
or unkown strength. but all should have the same chance to win.

because of the match + re with even more games in the next rounds, we eliminate a lucky punch of a low ranked player. from my point of view the pairing can be more mixed. in the end the best will win.

[ruben87]

Hi Stratego,

I dont know of this was Zach's idea. Its your interpretation. With youre schedule your making it easier for Ace (b1) at costs of playa1 (a1). It doesnt change much though.

Ok for me.

Ruben