Double Elimination Tournament!!!

[Black Cat 5791]

Ok when you play a double elimination tournament which do you prefer? Loser has to win twice, or an extended race. I run a weekly tournament race to 3 on the winners side and a race to 2 on the losers side, with an extended race to 5 in the Finals.

I've had some complain they want a true double elimination where the losers bracket winner has to defeat the winners bracket player twice because until then the winners side player has only lost once.

Black Cat

 

[easy-e]

The guys on the winner's side will complain if it's one extended race and the guy on the loser's side will complain if it's true double elimination. The same guy will complain differently from week to week depending on which side of the bracket he is on. Just do what makes you happy and live with the complainers.

 

[juegabillar]

Ok when you play a double elimination tournament which do you prefer? Loser has to win twice, or an extended race. I run a weekly tournament race to 3 on the winners side and a race to 2 on the losers side, with an extended race to 5 in the Finals.

I've had some complain they want a true double elimination where the losers bracket winner has to defeat the winners bracket player twice because until then the winners side player has only lost once.

Black Cat

Most people do a single elimination/extended race at the final to avoid a long final. At this point many people are tired and ready to go home. I always did a single elimination tournament to avoid having people on the road at wee hours of the night or with too much alcohol in their system.

If you think that another hour of tournament is best for everyone involved, then go for it. (just have safety first in mind).

 

[jrackman]

Double E says just that!, this way everyone has played the same amount of matches (2), and then no one can complain..jmo

 

[twal]

Winner of the loosers bracket needs to beat the winner of the winners bracket twice.

I have been on the winners side many times and sitting for 2+ hrs waiting for the loosers backet to finish.

This gives the winner of the winners bracket to at least get back into the groove w/o much of a penalty.

So if they loose the first match so what, they still have the chance to recover.

I would be pissed if you ran it any other way.

 

[BFrench501]

The only other option I've toyed with personally is giving the person on the winners side a start if it's got ridiculously late, and extended race/winning twice isn't an option.

 

[Black-Balled]

Winner of the loosers bracket needs to beat the winner of the winners bracket twice.

I have been on the winners side many times and sitting for 2+ hrs waiting for the loosers backet to finish.

This gives the winner of the winners bracket to at least get back into the groove w/o much of a penalty.

So if they loose the first match so what, they still have the chance to recover.

I would be pissed if you ran it any other way.

You can't be pissed. You agreed to the rules all the way up until the end.

If you had a true issue with the format then you wouldn't have played.

 

[Black-Balled]

The only other option I've toyed with personally is giving the person on the winners side a start if it's got ridiculously late, and extended race/winning twice isn't an option.

'giving the person on the winners side a start'

what does that mean, please?

 

[Matt]

Theory vs. Practice

In theory, I can understand why some prefer to make it a true double elimination, but in practice I believe it works better to do the single extended race.

For those that think it's unfair that the player on the winner's side only gets to lose once, consider this: The purpose of playing a double elimination tournament is the put the "best" two players in the finals. This might include handicaps, so "best" could be a relative thing. In any case, if those two players meet early in the tournament, double elimination allows them both to make it to the finals. Provided that the pot is split between at least 1st and 2nd, the final match just determines who gets declared the winner and gets a bit more cash. For that reason, I like the split to be generous to the runner-up in a double elim tournament.

 

[pt109]

'giving the person on the winners side a start'

what does that mean, please?

I've been in tournaments where the finals was one set but the A-side winner
got two games on the wire.
The TD said the only other way he would do it was true double elimination

 

[nine_ball6970]

Most people do a single elimination/extended race at the final to avoid a long final. At this point many people are tired and ready to go home. I always did a single elimination tournament to avoid having people on the road at wee hours of the night or with too much alcohol in their system.

If you think that another hour of tournament is best for everyone involved, then go for it. (just have safety first in mind).

The extended race is fine when the races are to say 9 and 7. To double dip could take a really long time if both sets are close.

 

[Black Cat 5791]

Finally started getting some feedback not just votes. Personally I like the extended race. Because if you loose the first 1 or 2 games you still have the opportunity to get yourself together and mount a comeback.

This week I had a participant in the finals that felt it was unfair that he only had the option to lose just once. He felt that if the format remained all the way through to the finals as well, he could win with three games instead of 5, and if he lost the first set he could win the second with 2 games.

My argument is that the 1 loss side player has to win 5 games either way, so that is why it's just one set race to 5 in the Finals.

They still feel that it's punishing the winners side player, so this is why I've asked for the opinion.

So far the votes are leading for double elimination all the way through but let's get some more votes and explained opinions.

I'm going to go with the option that rules out the winner from the poll.

Thanks, Black Cat :thumbup: