China World=Poor Format

[BJTyler]

That's not obvious to me. If you play single elimination you can make each match roughly twice as long for the same tournament length.

I made my statement under the assumption of keeping all other variables fixed.

I agree with you that race length and the number of eliminations can be offset to leave the level of skill more of less constant.

I think an interesting theoretical question is the following: what tournament format (defined by match length, number of eliminations, seeding, alt/winner break) is the most efficient? That is, for a given likelihood of having the best player win the tournament, what format would result in the lowest number of expected games played?

 

[Bob Jewett]

I made my statement under the assumption of keeping all other variables fixed.

I agree with you that race length and the number of eliminations can be offset to leave the level of skill more of less constant.

I think an interesting theoretical question is the following: what tournament format (defined by match length, number of eliminations, seeding, alt/winner break) is the most efficient? That is, for a given likelihood of having the best player win the tournament, what format would result in the lowest number of expected games played?

As far as keeping variables fixed, that's not possible. One variable is how long the tournament can take and double elimination has twice as many rounds as single.

The most efficient format for determining the best player will likely use seeding but I suppose you are starting with no a priori knowledge of the skills of the players.

 

[BJTyler]

As far as keeping variables fixed, that's not possible. One variable is how long the tournament can take and double elimination has twice as many rounds as single.

The most efficient format for determining the best player will likely use seeding but I suppose you are starting with no a priori knowledge of the skills of the players.

There are two variables that were of interest to me, race length per match & number of eliminations. I was keeping the former variable fixed while perturbing the latter. Although both variables impact the tournament length, it still may be instructive to analyze the marginal impact of each variable on the system.

Even with no a priori knowledge of the skills of players, you may still be able to do things to make a tournament more efficient. For example, by having winner break, shorter races on the loser's side, or by increasing the race length as you advance throughout the tournament, you may be able to reduce the tournament length while maintaining comparable skill levels.

 

[Bob Jewett]

I don't understand your point regarding keeping variables fixed. There are two variables that were of interest to me, ...

Other variables are important to other people. Tournament length is important to me as a TD. As such it seems to me that you want to find the best format that will fit in a 3-day weekend, for example, and not the best format that has races to 11.

 

[BJTyler]

Other variables are important to other people. Tournament length is important to me as a TD. As such it seems to me that you want to find the best format that will fit in a 3-day weekend, for example, and not the best format that has races to 11.

My statement was that double elimination favors better players (by increasing their likelihood of winning). Obviously, if we go around making other changes (such as race length) we can further increase/reduce the chances.

It's kind of like saying earning more income allows you to buy more stuff. Of course if we double prices, this may not be true.

 

[lewis_rva]

Success is not only about being fair

As far as keeping variables fixed, that's not possible. One variable is how long the tournament can take and double elimination has twice as many rounds as single.

The most efficient format for determining the best player will likely use seeding but I suppose you are starting with no a priori knowledge of the skills of the players.

It's hard to argue against seeded, single elimination, long match format being the preferred way to crown a champion in the sports world. If you look at major sports championships they're all single elimination in the final rounds. Some tournaments have a group/round robin opening round where a loss may not lead to elimination but none are double elimination.

Pool tournaments especially at the amateur and regional level have different considerations than pro sports tournaments where there are no entry fees. Most pool tournaments have to fund the prize money from the entrants. As a result they need a format that encourages all level of player to compete. Shorter races, no seeding, and double elimination all encourage the "dead money" to sign up. That dead money makes tournaments economically viable for the contenders.

I'd argue that a format like the China Open is fair and a good choice for a world ranking tournament. My only criticism is I believe the races should have been much longer. To fly people in from all over the world for just a race to 9 doesn't make much sense to me.

 

[BJTyler]

It's hard to argue against seeded, single elimination, long match format being the preferred way to crown a champion in the sports world. If you look at major sports championships they're all single elimination in the final rounds. Some tournaments have a group/round robin opening round where a loss may not lead to elimination but none are double elimination.

Pool tournaments especially at the amateur and regional level have different considerations than pro sports tournaments where there are no entry fees. Most pool tournaments have to fund the prize money from the entrants. As a result they need a format that encourages all level of player to compete. Shorter races, no seeding, and double elimination all encourage the "dead money" to sign up. That dead money makes tournaments economically viable for the contenders.

I'd argue that a format like the China Open is fair and a good choice for a world ranking tournament. My only criticism is I believe the races should have been much longer. To fly people in from all over the world for just a race to 9 doesn't make much sense to me.

I think one of the benefits of a single elimination tournament format is that it really maximizes the drama and excitement for the spectators. It's hard to get super-excited for a final set that may or may not decide the winner.