Interesting Tournament Format

C

chalkisfree

Registered
I've been playing in several small tournaments in various pool halls in the Tokyo area of Japan, and they all use a tournament format that I haven't seen in the US. Everybody plays in the first round (if there is an odd number of players I think there is one bye). The losers of the first round matches play each other while the winners wait. The winners of THOSE matches get thrown back with the original winners, and the losers are out. From that point on it is single elimination. I think this format saves time, but don't know why it isn't being used in the tournaments I've played in back in the States. Does anybody know what this format is called and where I can get more info on it?
 
Jude Rosenstock

Jude Rosenstock

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
chalkisfree said:
I've been playing in several small tournaments in various pool halls in the Tokyo area of Japan, and they all use a tournament format that I haven't seen in the US. Everybody plays in the first round (if there is an odd number of players I think there is one bye). The losers of the first round matches play each other while the winners wait. The winners of THOSE matches get thrown back with the original winners, and the losers are out. From that point on it is single elimination. I think this format saves time, but don't know why it isn't being used in the tournaments I've played in back in the States. Does anybody know what this format is called and where I can get more info on it?
Click to expand...



Modified single elimination. The first round is identical in appearance to a double-elimination chart. Afterwards, it is strictly single elimination with the left-side of the chart getting moved back to the winner's side. It assures everyone gets to play at least 2 matches.

The APA uses it for all individual matches in Regional and National events. I'm sure you can review some of their charts for ideas.
 
C

chalkisfree

Registered
Thanx Jude. Any insight as to why this format isn't more widespread? I like the idea that you are guaranteed two matches, and it saves time. I would like to pitch it to some friends at a couple pool halls back home.
 
Jack Flanagan

Jack Flanagan

P. T. Barnum was right !
Silver Member
that format saves time,,,but guarantees a larger number of players will ONLY play two matches, as opposed to a true double elimination bracket, where half of the players get to play in more than two matches,,,if time is a problem, use that format,,,if not use double elimination,,,,'the longer they stay at your place, more $ they potentially spend,,,JMHO.
 
C

chalkisfree

Registered
Jack Flanagan said:
that format saves time,,,but guarantees a larger number of players will ONLY play two matches, as opposed to a true double elimination bracket, where half of the players get to play in more than two matches,,,if time is a problem, use that format,,,if not use double elimination,,,,'the longer they stay at your place, more $ they potentially spend,,,JMHO.
Click to expand...
Makes good sense to me, Jack. Arigato!
 
Bob Jewett

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
chalkisfree said:
( modified single/double elimination) Does anybody know what this format is called and where I can get more info on it?
Click to expand...
Another format that accomplishes more or less the same thing is to form groups of 3 and play a round robin within the group. (two of three play, loser plays waiter, final pair play) The winner of each group of three goes on to a single elimination chart.

One problem with the system you described is that the winners have to wait. If you don't have enough tables for everyone to play anyway, this isn't a problem. Another problem is that if you have to place byes, some won't get two matches.
 
hobokenapa

hobokenapa

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
my format

The format I use for my 8-ball tournament every two months is :

Twelve players.

Every player plays every other player once in ONE RACK of 8-ball. Use six tables. No order, just play when people are available and mark up the result.

After the round-robin is over, rank all the players by wins. The top five make it through to the ladder stage (I have tie-break rules but won't bore you with those now). We then move to one table where everyone can watch.

5th plays 4th in one rack. Winner moves on. Loser out.
Winner of above match plays 3rd in one rack. Winner moves on. Loser out.
Winner of above match plays 2nd in one rack. Winner moves on to Final. Loser out.
Winner of above match plays 1st in a BEST OF THREE final.

The players seem to enjoy the format and it creates a lot of tension at the end. It takes about 3-4 hours to complete so it's ideal for a weekday evening.

The top eight players automatically qualify for the next event. The bottom four are relegated and have to compete in a qualifying event with a load of other players the night before the next event, and finish in the top four to qualify.

The format ensures that every match in the main round means something. Either battling for a place (the higher up in the round-robin, the more chance of winning the tournament), or avoiding relegation battling for eighth place and having to pre-qualify next time.

I made this format up myself but I guess it's nothing new.
 
C

chalkisfree

Registered
Bob Jewett said:
Another format that accomplishes more or less the same thing is to form groups of 3 and play a round robin within the group. (two of three play, loser plays waiter, final pair play) The winner of each group of three goes on to a single elimination chart.

One problem with the system you described is that the winners have to wait. If you don't have enough tables for everyone to play anyway, this isn't a problem. Another problem is that if you have to place byes, some won't get two matches.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the input, Bob. As you pointed out, the bye issue poses a problem. If I only could speak better Japanese, I could find out how these tournament directors get around that, and if it's fair to all players.

I really like the round robin/single elimination format. Very interesting departure from the old boring double elimination format!

Your March BD article on custom-fitting systems was enlightening, and should be helpful to a lot of people, myself included. When I get back from Japan I will be buying my first table, and I am already planning the experiments I will be doing on it, involving systems, break patterns, etc. Stuff that's hard to do when you're paying by the hour and there's a heckling section watching your every move!
 
Jack Flanagan

Jack Flanagan

P. T. Barnum was right !
Silver Member
I use a similar round robin, into a final four tournament format...I put the players into a group of no more than five; is about the only change,,,if you wind up with a tie 'cause of round robin scoring, the two lowest people play a set and then it goes to a final four format,,,,,works for me,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,the final four or five is played on one table and the grumbling non-tourney players can 'go at it' on the open tables,,,LOL
 
C

chalkisfree

Registered
hobokenapa said:
The format I use for my 8-ball tournament every two months is :

Twelve players.

Every player plays every other player once in ONE RACK of 8-ball. Use six tables. No order, just play when people are available and mark up the result.

After the round-robin is over, rank all the players by wins. The top five make it through to the ladder stage (I have tie-break rules but won't bore you with those now). We then move to one table where everyone can watch.

5th plays 4th in one rack. Winner moves on. Loser out.
Winner of above match plays 3rd in one rack. Winner moves on. Loser out.
Winner of above match plays 2nd in one rack. Winner moves on to Final. Loser out.
Winner of above match plays 1st in a BEST OF THREE final.


I really like your format, and I'm dying to try it out. Of course credit will be given - it will be called the hobokenapa format :cool:

I'm interested in your rules for tie-breaks. The ONLY thing I would try to change in this great format is the single-game match. Maybe break up the whole thing into three nights to allow for longer matches. First night, QUALIFIER NIGHT - single elimination, races to at least three. Second night, ROUND ROBIN NIGHT - races to at least three. Third night, TOP FIVE - races to at least five, with a longer race for the final. Would probably need some fine-tuning, but it could take off. Thanks for your cool ideas!
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
hobokenapa

hobokenapa

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
The one night format works best for us. Not everyone can make it three nights in a row. We have the Qualifier on Mondays, the event on Tuesday. Also everyone stays till the end to watch the final matches. If you are knocked out a day early that would not happen.

The way I break ties is:

If players are tied but are both in a qualifying position. i.e. two tied for 3rd, higher place is awarded to winner of the rack between the two players. If two or more are tied, it goes on matches between the three players. If that is a round-robin, players lag.

If players are tied for a qualifying position. i.e. two tied for 5th, there is a one sudden death rack.

In summary, players cannot be eliminated without one more rack if they are tied for 5th or above.

Last time, we had three tied for 5th, so all three lagged with the two losers having the one rack decider (basically it became a 7-person ladder)

Hope the format works for you! Obviously it can be tweaked for your particular group of players and time constraints.

One more thing, the one rack matches work really well. EVERY rack is important! :)
 
mjantti

mjantti

Enjoying life
Silver Member
chalkisfree said:
I've been playing in several small tournaments in various pool halls in the Tokyo area of Japan, and they all use a tournament format that I haven't seen in the US. Everybody plays in the first round (if there is an odd number of players I think there is one bye). The losers of the first round matches play each other while the winners wait. The winners of THOSE matches get thrown back with the original winners, and the losers are out. From that point on it is single elimination. I think this format saves time, but don't know why it isn't being used in the tournaments I've played in back in the States. Does anybody know what this format is called and where I can get more info on it?
Click to expand...

Let me get this straight: lets say a tournament has 34 players, 17 matches in the first round which leaves 17 losers. So, does the one lucky loser get a bye while the other 16 1.round losers play each other ? That would drop 8 players out, thus leaving 17 winners with one match, 8 losers with 2 matches and 1 loser with 1 match played: equals 26. How do you have a single elimination with 26 players, you'd need to have 6 byes in the first round of single elimination, or ?

Sounds too complicated to me... :confused:
 
mjantti

mjantti

Enjoying life
Silver Member
This worked quite well in a 8-ball weekly tournament in Prague, Czech Republic.

Divide all players into groups of 4. In each group, it's round robin (everyone against everyone), race-to-1. Every player from each group qualify for the single elimination, but group winners are placed in their own single elimination "winner side", which gives a shorter way to final. Other players have their own single elimination "loser side" which gives a longer way to final. Single elimination is played race-to-4, loser breaks.
 
Jude Rosenstock

Jude Rosenstock

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
mjantti said:
Let me get this straight: lets say a tournament has 34 players, 17 matches in the first round which leaves 17 losers. So, does the one lucky loser get a bye while the other 16 1.round losers play each other ? That would drop 8 players out, thus leaving 17 winners with one match, 8 losers with 2 matches and 1 loser with 1 match played: equals 26. How do you have a single elimination with 26 players, you'd need to have 6 byes in the first round of single elimination, or ?

Sounds too complicated to me... :confused:
Click to expand...


No matter what kind of single/modified single-elimination tournament you have, unless you're starting with a tournament number of participants (2, 4, 8, 16, 32, etc.), you're inevitably going to have an odd number of matches. It's unavoidable. When dealing with an odd number and the goal is to have everyone play a minimum of two matches yet not a double-elimination tournament, set up the brackets to have double-elimination for the first two rounds. If you already have a tournament number, double-elimination is only necessary for one round.

Once the losers' side of the bracket has reached the end, these remaining players are reincorported to the winners side. At that point, single-elimination ensues. If you're in dire need of attaining a tournament chart, PM me and I'll see what I can do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top