urbanjedi wrote:
So are we using Lobo's program or are we using the DCI reporter for pairings and using an alternate method to keep track of points?
Yes, we are using Lobo's program. This has already been decided. Aaron is working on adding the next level to the algorithm to help with avoiding rematches, but it's doubtful he will have it done in time.
urbanjedi wrote:
The whole idea behind a Swiss tourney is that no one plays another player twice during the Swiss portion.
That is pretty much completely untrue. The idea of swiss is to allow everyone to play muliple rounds of play (instead of single elimination) and to rank players 1-whatever based on how they do at the end of the day. The avoiding rematches is not a part of swiss at all. It's an additional level in the algorithm that is used by WotC - it probably had something to do with Magic, but it is not a part of all Swiss events. I've played in other games where this wasn't used.
urbanjedi wrote:
IMO we should use DCI reporter for auto-generated pairings and then keep track of 3/2 on a seperate sheet of paper. Yes I know that a 10 pt 5-0 might play against a 13 or 14 or even 15 pt 5-0
Nope, not going to. The rankings are determined by points, and we will be using points to pair. We've talked about it extensively (including the current thread) and we feel that it will work better this way.
urbanjedi wrote:
but I think that is better than the alternative at this point of either straight out manual pairing or going through and making sure that no one is paired twice or that no one is double paired, etc.
Ok, well I don't.
urbanjedi wrote:
Hopefully by the time next year rolls around we will have a program that can handle what we need/want to do but until that time I think we must go with the DCI reporter route for quickness of the in between round.
Well I hope so to. However that does not mean that using the DCI reporter is a better way to go. Considering the actual point of swiss (having 1-2, 3-4, 5-6, 7-8 play each other every round, it's more important for accurate results to do it this way. Having a rematch is actually less significant than giving someone the easier schedule by using a system that isn't meant to measure what we are rating players on.
urbanjedi wrote:
I don't feel like taking 12-14 hrs to play 7 rounds of Swiss because of pairing issues.
Don't be dramatic, it will not take this long at all. The Champ will be no longer than it normally has been. We know what we are doing, and I can say with all sincerity that we will be at least as fast as Passtimes has been in the past.
urbanjedi wrote:
On a seperate note how do we want "the program" to pair? Should the best 3-0 play the worst 3-0? Should the best play 2nd best? Should it be random?
Best plays the best, that's how swiss works, and how it's meant to be. This should not be changed.
urbanjedi wrote:
What happens if there is an odd number and someone has to play down? Should it be random who plays down? Should the best person play down? Just some food for thought (and probably wrong thread) because until we know how the rounds are "supposed" to be paired we will never be able to pair a tourney correctly.
Lowest ranking plays down, that's how swiss works. And clearly you aren't that familiar with Lobo's program, but this is what it already does. 1v2, 3v4, 5v6 and so on. Obviously in the early rounds there isn't much differenciation. But as player records (points, OWP, OOWP) start to develop the rankings become more clear. That's how it's supposed to work, and that's actually what we have now.
The problem with Lobo's program at the moment is that it actually does this too well. The DCI reporter software actually avoids rematches by breaking the 1v2, 3v4 system when necessary. It's very complex to program it to do that. But what you end up with is something like 1v2, 3v5, 4v8, 6v7 in a lot of cases to avoid rematches. Lobo's is actually a more accurate swiss system in that you will always play the correctly ranked opponent - which in the end, actually gives a better result for each player at the end of the day in terms of accuracy of the rankings. So while it's not ideal, it is still better than the alternative. Using the DCI reporter and ranking by SoS will not give an accurate result without being very lucky. We will use Lobo's and do the best we can to avoid rematches, but honestly, it isn't the top concern in any way.