Update on ASC Winter
Re: Update on ASC Winter
With no pr limit we could have at least 20 players more but 256 is just a dream
Re: Update on ASC Winter
Signups are closed now. Another update post is coming soon with official start of the group stage and the groups.
Re: Update on ASC Winter
Forgive me if this has been posted somewhere, but what is the formatting of the group stage? Is it just the first ~4 rounds of a very large single elimination bracket?
As someone involved in tournament organization in the FGC and at the high levels of play, I have a couple suggestions for how you could clear up your nomenclature when running tournaments.
First, if you're going to split a bracket into segments in any way, I would suggest calling the first or first and second segments "pools". If the segments are simply snapshots of a larger bracket, then call them "bracket pools". Swiss pools and RR (round robin) pools are other options, but I suspect for AoE too logistically complicated due to the number of sets that must be played between multiple parties across time zones.
Depending on how many segments you split the bracket into, you can have "rd. 1 pools" "rd. 2 pools", "rd. 1 pools", "rd. 2 bracket", "championship bracket", any combination you want really, etc. Additionally, it's useful to specify how many players advance from one segment to the next. This is commonly called "making it out" of pools.
Because there's no sense rocking the boat with this tournament and it's certainly the 11th hour, everything should go through as it's been planned. However, I would like to make a couple suggestions/throw ideas out to the tournament staff for future tournaments (hoping that they continue).
1: Here is a simply generated single elimination bracket with 154 players (the current number of entrants): http://challonge.com/tournaments/bracke ... fXSDQW8R2D
---Depending on how many players you subtract to seed into a championship bracket, the experience of single elimination changes drastically for the lower seeds. In the bracket provided, there are 26 first round matches that play into the highest seeds in the bracket. If you take a look at the top end of the bracket, consider that seed 113 will likely have a better tournament experience than seed 96, or 97. 113 gets to play a favored match, and then a match against a highly seeded player. For someone who doesn't expect to do very well at all, that seems like a good draw. 96 or 97 have to play a player seeded more than 60 spots higher than them immediately, but not even one of the top 25 seeds. 96 or 97 will likely lose in the first round to a semi-decent player and be instantly out of the tournament. If you work your way down the bracket, you'll see that this is a repeatable trend.
---The solution to this is to either have a bracket with no byes, where the bottom seeded players immediately play an excellent player and you have more competitive mid seeded matches in the 1st round, or to implement double elimination. You can achieve a bracket with no byes by seeding top players into a championship bracket until your initial bracket has a number of players that is a power of 2 (2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, etc). Double elimination sounds scary, but know that it can be implemented selectively and to great effect on either the beginning or end of the bracket to better the experience for participants and viewers!
For example: a 154 man double elimination bracket http://challonge.com/tournaments/bracke ... fy4bh0vIhf
There are a couple things you can do to truncate the loser's side of the bracket to your liking.
---First, you could decide to only play out the first 2-3 rounds of losers. This usually functions to give the bottom third of the player pool a chance to play 1-2 more sets, and a chance to separate themselves from each other instead of being lumped into the same tournament placing despite never playing a truly competitive set.
---Second, you could decide to only play out the LAST 4-6 rounds of losers. These matches are for the top players who lose in quarterfinals, semis, and finals to have a chance to run back through the bracket and redeem a loss in the winner's side. This is very viewer friendly, as it showcases more top matches between players that didn't have a chance to meet each other in bracket. Additionally, playing double elimination at the end of a bracket is hype. The winner of winner's finals must wait on the player who emerges from loser's and win one more set. If the loser's player wins a set, then the bracket resets and the last set is truly winner take-all. This also usually prevents players from having bracket-influenced excuses. In the last tournament, a player like Diarouga who thinks that they got cheesed for one set by an inferior player would have an opportunity to play his way into loser's finals and get another shot at Acergame after Acer lost to Sam. Salty rematches (often in a longer set) are hype, and they make the tournament harder to win. If Diarouga had run all the way through loser's and beaten Acer in a rematch, then Sam would have to play Diarouga (a player who just took mad names and proved his earlier loss a fluke) to win the tournament.
Sorry for the wall o' text, I hope it's at least readable.
As someone involved in tournament organization in the FGC and at the high levels of play, I have a couple suggestions for how you could clear up your nomenclature when running tournaments.
First, if you're going to split a bracket into segments in any way, I would suggest calling the first or first and second segments "pools". If the segments are simply snapshots of a larger bracket, then call them "bracket pools". Swiss pools and RR (round robin) pools are other options, but I suspect for AoE too logistically complicated due to the number of sets that must be played between multiple parties across time zones.
Depending on how many segments you split the bracket into, you can have "rd. 1 pools" "rd. 2 pools", "rd. 1 pools", "rd. 2 bracket", "championship bracket", any combination you want really, etc. Additionally, it's useful to specify how many players advance from one segment to the next. This is commonly called "making it out" of pools.
Because there's no sense rocking the boat with this tournament and it's certainly the 11th hour, everything should go through as it's been planned. However, I would like to make a couple suggestions/throw ideas out to the tournament staff for future tournaments (hoping that they continue).
1: Here is a simply generated single elimination bracket with 154 players (the current number of entrants): http://challonge.com/tournaments/bracke ... fXSDQW8R2D
---Depending on how many players you subtract to seed into a championship bracket, the experience of single elimination changes drastically for the lower seeds. In the bracket provided, there are 26 first round matches that play into the highest seeds in the bracket. If you take a look at the top end of the bracket, consider that seed 113 will likely have a better tournament experience than seed 96, or 97. 113 gets to play a favored match, and then a match against a highly seeded player. For someone who doesn't expect to do very well at all, that seems like a good draw. 96 or 97 have to play a player seeded more than 60 spots higher than them immediately, but not even one of the top 25 seeds. 96 or 97 will likely lose in the first round to a semi-decent player and be instantly out of the tournament. If you work your way down the bracket, you'll see that this is a repeatable trend.
---The solution to this is to either have a bracket with no byes, where the bottom seeded players immediately play an excellent player and you have more competitive mid seeded matches in the 1st round, or to implement double elimination. You can achieve a bracket with no byes by seeding top players into a championship bracket until your initial bracket has a number of players that is a power of 2 (2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, etc). Double elimination sounds scary, but know that it can be implemented selectively and to great effect on either the beginning or end of the bracket to better the experience for participants and viewers!
For example: a 154 man double elimination bracket http://challonge.com/tournaments/bracke ... fy4bh0vIhf
There are a couple things you can do to truncate the loser's side of the bracket to your liking.
---First, you could decide to only play out the first 2-3 rounds of losers. This usually functions to give the bottom third of the player pool a chance to play 1-2 more sets, and a chance to separate themselves from each other instead of being lumped into the same tournament placing despite never playing a truly competitive set.
---Second, you could decide to only play out the LAST 4-6 rounds of losers. These matches are for the top players who lose in quarterfinals, semis, and finals to have a chance to run back through the bracket and redeem a loss in the winner's side. This is very viewer friendly, as it showcases more top matches between players that didn't have a chance to meet each other in bracket. Additionally, playing double elimination at the end of a bracket is hype. The winner of winner's finals must wait on the player who emerges from loser's and win one more set. If the loser's player wins a set, then the bracket resets and the last set is truly winner take-all. This also usually prevents players from having bracket-influenced excuses. In the last tournament, a player like Diarouga who thinks that they got cheesed for one set by an inferior player would have an opportunity to play his way into loser's finals and get another shot at Acergame after Acer lost to Sam. Salty rematches (often in a longer set) are hype, and they make the tournament harder to win. If Diarouga had run all the way through loser's and beaten Acer in a rematch, then Sam would have to play Diarouga (a player who just took mad names and proved his earlier loss a fluke) to win the tournament.
Sorry for the wall o' text, I hope it's at least readable.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests