double to single elimination

[Paul Schofield]

all due respect why on earth is it a step in the right direction to give some players 1 chance and another 2?

No format worse than DE for many many reasons. I will address only one:

There is a sense, a feeling, when it is time for a tournament to conclude, finish, be done. There reaches a point in DE where there are too many rounds remaining to be played with too few competitors left. It just drags on and on and on. In the end, more often than not, interested parties leave and go home to bed or players just cut down the prize and be done with it. Why? Because it has just gone on too damn long.

Nothing brings a tournament to a timely, exciting conclusion like SE rounds.

Should I remind everyone that virtually all of our professional sports leagues have SE sudden death playoff rounds? Remember the 10-6 regular season Giants defeating the 16-0 regular season Patriots in the Super Bowl?

A good event is is one that peaks interest, not fairness.

Now altering the format from what is advertised, that is another issue.

Hopkins did the smart thing.

 

[BmoreMoney]

No format worse than DE for many many reasons. I will address only one:

There is a sense, a feeling, when it is time for a tournament to conclude, finish, be done. There reaches a point in DE where there are too many rounds remaining to be played with too few competitors left. It just drags on and on and on. In the end, more often than not, interested parties leave and go home to bed or players just cut down the prize and be done with it. Why? Because it has just gone on too damn long.

Nothing brings a tournament to a timely, exciting conclusion like SE rounds.

Should I remind everyone that virtually all of our professional sports leagues have SE sudden death playoff rounds? Remember the 10-6 regular season Giants defeating the 16-0 regular season Patriots in the Super Bowl?

A good event is is one that peaks interest, not fairness.

Now altering the format from what is advertised, that is another issue.

Hopkins did the smart thing.

What if at half time the Giants were told sorry but you have to win twice?

 

[AF pool guy]

I just looked at the 10ball bracket. I think this is a little overblown. Of the four guys who lost on the winners side in the final 16, all four lost their next match on the losers side. John Morra went 9-1 to win the tournament while SVB went "only" 7-1. Earl and the other winners side guy who tied for 5-8th had 4-1 records and the guys on the losers bracket had 5-2 and 6-2 records. Pretty close in my book. The extra 2-3 sets necessary for a full DE just wouldn't make that big a difference in the outcome.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[jasonlaus]

No format worse than DE for many many reasons. I will address only one:

There is a sense, a feeling, when it is time for a tournament to conclude, finish, be done. There reaches a point in DE where there are too many rounds remaining to be played with too few competitors left. It just drags on and on and on. In the end, more often than not, interested parties leave and go home to bed or players just cut down the prize and be done with it. Why? Because it has just gone on too damn long.

Nothing brings a tournament to a timely, exciting conclusion like SE rounds.

Should I remind everyone that virtually all of our professional sports leagues have SE sudden death playoff rounds? Remember the 10-6 regular season Giants defeating the 16-0 regular season Patriots in the Super Bowl?

A good event is is one that peaks interest, not fairness.

Now altering the format from what is advertised, that is another issue.

Hopkins did the smart thing.

Terrible analogy! Those guys make millions and the only time they get paid to perform is the super bowl. Poolplayers maker their living by how they place in a tournament. Nobody gives a crap about "interest"

 

[GeoEnvi]

I think last year it was Double Elimination throughout, up until the finals match. Instead of two separate races to 10 (in the case where the Loser's Bracket winner won the first set against the Winner's Bracket winner), it was one race to 13.

 

[skip100]

I'm having trouble getting worked up over this. It's still better to stay in the winner's bracket because you have to play and win fewer matches. Then on the final day there is a predictable (timing-wise) and suspenseful elimination round among the top 8 players that lets everyone get home at a reasonable time.

 

[TheLoneSilencer]

I just looked at the 10ball bracket. I think this is a little overblown. Of the four guys who lost on the winners side in the final 16, all four lost their next match on the losers side. John Morra went 9-1 to win the tournament while SVB went "only" 7-1. Earl and the other winners side guy who tied for 5-8th had 4-1 records and the guys on the losers bracket had 5-2 and 6-2 records. Pretty close in my book. The extra 2-3 sets necessary for a full DE just wouldn't make that big a difference in the outcome.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

What you fail to get is the event was advertised as double elimination & I bet the majority of entries took place when that was the setup. It all of a sudden changed & some say it was not mentioned in the players meeting.

It is completely inexcusable to get knocked out of a tournament with only one loss by someone who had 1 loss earlier. It is almost like the college football playoff system where it pays to lose early versus late in the season as you will get penalized less for it.

 

[AF pool guy]

What you fail to get is the event was advertised as double elimination & I bet the majority of entries took place when that was the setup. It all of a sudden changed & some say it was not mentioned in the players meeting.



It is completely inexcusable to get knocked out of a tournament with only one loss by someone who had 1 loss earlier. It is almost like the college football playoff system where it pays to lose early versus late in the season as you will get penalized less for it.

I already acknowledged that changing the format after the fact is a foul. But I also fail to see anyone complaining about the actual payouts for 3rd through 16th place increasing when they went modified DE. Sure Earl and the other winners bracket final four didn't get a second chance at the $10K, but last I checked $2,600 is more than $1,750.

Proposed payouts for full DE vs actual payout for the modified DE are here http://www.superbilliardsexpo.com/Pro10Ball-Registration.html

 

[Skippy27]

how? player a wins for example 5 matches in a row on the winners side(plays perfect)
player b loses 2nd match now comes through losers bracket to the 3/4 or 5/8 spots?
thats rediculous..nobody goes to lose but why do some get 2 chances and others get 1?
how does that make sense?

The single biggest explanation I would have is that unless you are doing fully seated tournament you don't know who or how they should be seated to begin with so the very best players may meet up in the first or 2nd round. Depending on how big it is then chances are those kinds of match ups are over by quarter final time and the better ones will still be in the winners bracket and the not so better ones will be in the losers bracket.

I would say that if you allow the loser bracket winner to come back up and play for the finals, then you can't rightfully turn it into a single elimination. If you are going to go single elimination, then the winner in the loser bracket is 3rd place and that is the best they can do. Otherwise, the loser in the winners side finals should get the chance to play the loser side winner for the right play the winners side again. To me, if you lose then the best you should ever be able to do is 3rd.

In our 16 man state wrestling tournament, if you lost in the first round and the guy that beat you lost in the 2nd round, you were out. If they won, you wrestled the other person they beat in the second round and continued on in the wrestle backs until you either won 3rd or took one of the other 4-6 spots. But they had some seating to it in that a sectional/district winner would never wrestle another sectional/district winner 1st round from anywhere in the state. So if you lost that 1st round chances are you are not the 1st or 2nd best anyway, but could possibly still be the 3rd best.

 

[TheLoneSilencer]

I already acknowledged that changing the format after the fact is a foul. But I also fail to see anyone complaining about the actual payouts for 3rd through 16th place increasing when they went modified DE. Sure Earl and the other winners bracket final four didn't get a second chance at the $10K, but last I checked $2,600 is more than $1,750.

Proposed payouts for full DE vs actual payout for the modified DE are here http://www.superbilliardsexpo.com/Pro10Ball-Registration.html

This is not about payouts but about what is the proper way to do things & sudden changes like this are not it.

 

[jasonlaus]

I already acknowledged that changing the format after the fact is a foul. But I also fail to see anyone complaining about the actual payouts for 3rd through 16th place increasing when they went modified DE. Sure Earl and the other winners bracket final four didn't get a second chance at the $10K, but last I checked $2,600 is more than $1,750.

Proposed payouts for full DE vs actual payout for the modified DE are here http://www.superbilliardsexpo.com/Pro10Ball-Registration.html

Wish your boss would hand you a check for 1/4 of what you should get then tell you its better than 1/6th. That would be priceless!

 

[AF pool guy]

Wish your boss would hand you a check for 1/4 of what you should get then tell you its better than 1/6th. That would be priceless!

First let me concur for the third time that changing format on the fly is a bad thing. That being said I just wanted to point out that no one is complaining that the total payout increased from the proposed $35k to $47k.

Anyway, in a full 64 man DE a guy who loses in the fifth round on the winners side has less than a 1/32 chance of coming back to win the whole thing.

 

[sbpoolleague]

Over the past 15 years I have directed over 1000 tournaments, and one of the worst things I ever did was change a tourney format mid-tournament. Whether it be a bracket change or a change in the races, I learned the hard way to carefully set the format and stick with it. I was not at the SBE and have no idea if that is what happened here. I'm just giving my opinion.

I have used this modified single elimination format often. The only time I get complaints is when the format is not clearly explained to all. The majority of players prefer having double elimination so to me it does not make sense to start with single elimination and change to double. If you had to shift where the single elimination occurred in a bracket I would suggest making the non-money rounds of the one-loss side single elimination, and leave everything else double elimination.

Back to the modified single elimination format... I have never tried this, but I think it would be fair to slightly handicap the very first match of the single elimination. In a tourney with no re-draw, this round of play usually has all the players from the one-loss bracket playing the winners bracket. Add one more game to the one-loss player. If it was a race to 4, change it to a race to 5/4.

 

[fastone371]

No format worse than DE for many many reasons. I will address only one:

There is a sense, a feeling, when it is time for a tournament to conclude, finish, be done. There reaches a point in DE where there are too many rounds remaining to be played with too few competitors left. It just drags on and on and on. In the end, more often than not, interested parties leave and go home to bed or players just cut down the prize and be done with it. Why? Because it has just gone on too damn long.

Nothing brings a tournament to a timely, exciting conclusion like SE rounds.

Should I remind everyone that virtually all of our professional sports leagues have SE sudden death playoff rounds? Remember the 10-6 regular season Giants defeating the 16-0 regular season Patriots in the Super Bowl?

A good event is is one that peaks interest, not fairness.

Now altering the format from what is advertised, that is another issue.

Hopkins did the smart thing.

Anyone remember the Yankees going undefeated in the playoffs? Lakers? Jordan and the Bulls? Blackhawks? Yeah, me neither, football is one of the few single elimination formats, most other sports use series to determine the winner. One of the reasons that makes DE good is it is very easy to lose a match if it is a short race, like most of us weekend bangers are used to. If its a long race I would be more accepting of a single elimination.

 

[Paul Schofield]

Anyone remember the Yankees going undefeated in the playoffs? Lakers? Jordan and the Bulls? Blackhawks? Yeah, me neither, football is one of the few single elimination formats, most other sports use series to determine the winner. One of the reasons that makes DE good is it is very easy to lose a match if it is a short race, like most of us weekend bangers are used to. If its a long race I would be more accepting of a single elimination.

Baseball, Basketball, and Hockey Playoffs are SE: 1 game, best of 3, best of 5, best of 7, all are SE. Just look at any playoff bracket. No better way to conclude a competition.

Last year, I watched my Pirates, with the second best record in all of baseball, go down in the first round of the playoffs.

 

[fastone371]

Baseball, Basketball, and Hockey Playoffs are SE: 1 game, best of 3, best of 5, best of 7, all are SE. Just look at any playoff bracket. No better way to conclude a competition.

Last year, I watched my Pirates, with the second best record in all of baseball, go down in the first round of the playoffs.

I would call football single elimination because 1 loss sends you home where other sports you play a series which to me compares more to double elimination. The multiple games you play in a match is more equivalent to a single game in other sports, if you play a 1 game race your day could be over in less than 5 minutes.

 

[spartan]

Over the past 15 years I have directed over 1000 tournaments, and one of the worst things I ever did was change a tourney format mid-tournament. Whether it be a bracket change or a change in the races, I learned the hard way to carefully set the format and stick with it. I was not at the SBE and have no idea if that is what happened here. I'm just giving my opinion.

I have used this modified single elimination format often. The only time I get complaints is when the format is not clearly explained to all. The majority of players prefer having double elimination so to me it does not make sense to start with single elimination and change to double. If you had to shift where the single elimination occurred in a bracket I would suggest making the non-money rounds of the one-loss side single elimination, and leave everything else double elimination.

Back to the modified single elimination format... I have never tried this, but I think it would be fair to slightly handicap the very first match of the single elimination. In a tourney with no re-draw, this round of play usually has all the players from the one-loss bracket playing the winners bracket. Add one more game to the one-loss player. If it was a race to 4, change it to a race to 5/4.

+1
Majors and international tourneys go from DE (or group stage ) to SE not other way round
As someone said , this way minis use the flukes of top guys getting knocked out early by less notable players
It is fine for this tourney to have 1st stage DE and then 2nd stage last 16 SE but it should be informed before tourney starts and more importantly , they should have redraw ft 2nd stage and if not redraw then some sort of seeding like winners side players play losers side players