Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

What is the minimum number of Swiss rounds?

S

SteveP

Active Member
The ads for the Challenges say that the number of Swiss rounds is based on the attendance. WOTC specifically stated the number of Swiss rounds for their SBZs. I've not seen any such guidelines from POP.

So, for the Challenges that use Age-modified Swiss and Age-separated Playoffs, do you base the number of Swiss rounds on the size of largest age-group or the size of the entire player list?

And, are you planning of using the old DCI log-base-2 formula?
 
SteveP said:
The ads for the Challenges say that the number of Swiss rounds is based on the attendance. WOTC specifically stated the number of Swiss rounds for their SBZs. I've not seen any such guidelines from POP.
Click to expand...

Steve,

PUI with the paper work for the winners of the of the Gym Challenge also sent with it a over view of sugguestions on how the tournament should be run. Included with this is a break down of number of rounds that is needed with attendance. So there are now offical guidelines for this. You might want to see if your PTO has it so you can read it over before you tournament on Saturday in CO.
 
Is there any reason at all that a PTO can't post that info here? After all for us non-PTO premier event organisers we need to be fed the info somehow and often it doesn't make it to our distributors either :(
 
ukpokemonpro said:
Is there any reason at all that a PTO can't post that info here? After all for us non-PTO premier event organisers we need to be fed the info somehow and often it doesn't make it to our distributors either :(
Click to expand...


The Gym Recommendations sheet that my PTO gave me DIDN'T indicate the minimum number of rounds based on attendance. Thus, I used log-base-2 and added one more round to break the log jam at the 4th position (I only had to use the tiebreaker once to cut to Top 4).
 
I think that old DCI system could be right.
So until 16 players 4 round swiss
16-32 players 5 round swiss
33-64 players 6 round swiss
and so on....
 
Here's the official recommendation from POP along with suggested cuts:

8 or less - 3 rounds
9-16 - 4 rounds (cut to T4)
17-32 - 5 rounds (cut to T8)
33-64 - 6 rounds (cut to T16)
65-128 - 7 rounds (cut to T32)
 
DaytonGymLeader said:
Here's the official recommendation from POP along with suggested cuts:

8 or less - 3 rounds
9-16 - 4 rounds (cut to T4)
17-32 - 5 rounds (cut to T8)
33-64 - 6 rounds (cut to T16)
65-128 - 7 rounds (cut to T32)
Click to expand...


It's still unclear whether to apply these based upon the total number of players or the number in each age group. In Florida we have been basing the number of rounds on the largest age group, then cut based on the individual groups.
 
Hagrid23 said:
It's still unclear whether to apply these based upon the total number of players or the number in each age group. In Florida we have been basing the number of rounds on the largest age group, then cut based on the individual groups.
Click to expand...

You apply these numbers on the total number of players in the tournament. You apply it to the total number in the tournament because in Age Modified Swiss all players have the potential to play every player. You would apply it to the age group ONLY if you were running a seperate tournament for the age group.

However, since your cut to the top players IS by age group, you apply the standards for the cut to the number of players in each age group. That means you can have a T4 in one group while you have T8 in another.

BDS
 
Last edited:
Those numbers look wrong to me top 32 cut would mean 5 more rounds of play after 7 rounds already .. how do we fit it in?

3 hours of extra time with tight round times and no breaks! Add that to 7 rounds and we are looking at 9hrs with minimal breaks I can see a lot fractious kids and adults ..

Did anyone think before they got the calculator out?
 
ukpokemonpro said:
Did anyone think before they got the calculator out?
Click to expand...

Nevermind that thinking stuff!

But seriously,

Big Daddy Snorlax said:
However, since your cut to the top players IS by age group, you apply the standards for the cut to the number of players in each age group. That means you can have a T4 in one group while you have T8 in another.
Click to expand...

So then, for our GC (L.A., really Irvine, CA) with 67 we had 7 rounds. The finals were 8 players for 15+ and 11-14 and then 4 players for 10- appropriate to the numbers for each group.

I think EVERYONE was happy to have 7 rounds although some of the 10- ended up playing older players because of record, odd numbers, and the fact that they didn't make the minimum (16) for us to go age separated.
 
ukpokemonpro said:
Those numbers look wrong to me top 32 cut would mean 5 more rounds of play after 7 rounds already .. how do we fit it in?

3 hours of extra time with tight round times and no breaks! Add that to 7 rounds and we are looking at 9hrs with minimal breaks I can see a lot fractious kids and adults ..

Did anyone think before they got the calculator out?
Click to expand...

I agree that the tournament would be too long if we had to do an additional 5 rounds, but in reality, would that ever happen with the attendance we're getting. Let's say your biggest age group accounts for half of the players attending. That means the overall attendance would have to be 130 before that group got to 65, triggering the T32. It might be possible to get a group large enough to trigger the T16, which is an additional 4 rounds, but these are Premier events after all. ;)

BDS
 
Last edited:
The one event in the UK that could get to those kinda numbers 'BDS is being held 3 hours drive away from most of the player base. So if it does come to pass that it's 3 hours driving there 9 odd hours of play and 3 hours back there will be some really really grumpy players ...

Still at least we get a Nationals this year :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top