18-0 at Nationals has a gripe.

[DukeFireBird]

I dont understand your point edwarpy.

POP did a swiss + Single elim, and Was said at the start of the event.

The only change was that the single elim was a single game, to a best of 3 with 45 minutes. Nothing you put in your post has any bearing on this.

Also...

Tournament guidelines.
19. Document Updates
Pokémon Organized Play reserves the right to alter these rules, as well as the right to interpret, modify,
clarify, or otherwise issue official changes to these rules, with or without prior notice.

 

[SteveP]

I dont understand your point edwarpy.

POP did a swiss + Single elim, and Was said at the start of the event.

The only change was that the single elim was a single game, to a best of 3 with 45 minutes. Nothing you put in your post has any bearing on this.

Also...

Tournament guidelines.
19. Document Updates
Pokémon Organized Play reserves the right to alter these rules, as well as the right to interpret, modify,
clarify, or otherwise issue official changes to these rules, with or without prior notice.

IMO, there-in lies the problem. In this context, the right to make unannouced changes to the rules pertains to the document.

The gripe has to do with "disregard" to the documented rules (or guidelines) by POP. If a TO/HJ disregards the rules, they are interrogated, reprimanded, or fired. In this aspect, POP is the law-giver and is "above the law."

I'm not convinced that changing 1-game matches to best-of-3 mid-stream is wrong. I once saw a TO change the Top cut from 2 to 4 after he was convinced that it was the proper thing to do. I think someone convinced POP that best-of-3 in the playoffs was the proper thing to do, so they did the "right" thing, though IMO, 45 minutes wasn't very good, though certainly within the letter-of-the-law.

 

[Lawman]

You also have to remember that Worlds is a more controlled event, in that OP knows how many seats/players will be invited. At Nats, it is wide open and the numbers are unsure. We had over 1100 pre registered players on friday. No one knew how many would show up saturday am to register then. IMO, OP addressed all the issues they could at the start of the tourney, including a t128 announcement. When they evaluated the time issues and the "donk" issues a 1 game match in SEF could cause, they made it a bo3, 45 min match. I'd say 99.9% of the players agreed with this "change of plans".

As the old saying goes, it is their game and they control the rules. If they want to take their ball home and break up the game, they can!

Keith

 

[SteveP]

I can certainly understand the need to "control" the timeline. Nevertheless, I don't understand why rounds take so long at Nats. Isn't there a way to streamline the process? It doesn't seem right that it takes 45 minutes after one round ends before the next round starts.

If the bottleneck is data entry, why not develop an offline interface where you could have multiple people entering match results, then upload the results? If the tournament software is the bottleneck, then perhaps some software engineering changes will help. :smile:

 

[bullados]

Try inputting the data from 600 matches in less than 10 minutes when the slips aren't organized by table number. My assumption is that they ran 4 computers, with 4 different operators. The Jrs and Srs each had about 120-140 matches to input. The Mas computers each had over 150 entries. They have to input all of the data, organize the paper trail, and doublecheck every slip before they can go on to the next round. And that's not including all of the overtime games that happen between each round. The bottleneck is a little bit of everything. The program itself. The data entry. The methods of verification (mistakes can and usually do happen). Remember also that a good portion of Nationals is run by volunteers. Though these are the best volunteers out there, they generally have never worked together before, and there's always going to be a little bit of growing pains. Notice that things got significantly better as the day went on and people began to get used both to the procedure and each other.

They had one hour turnaround times all day on Saturday. To me, that's reasonable to good given the attendance.

 

[SteveP]

20 minutes between rounds? Was that really what happened at Nats? It seemed more like double that.

I don't know the entire process of recording matches. I do remember Patricia McCann recording our MTW Regionals a few years ago, with over 100 players, and she was really fast and accurate, maybe 5 minutes between rounds, if that. If there's only one person for each pod to enter all the results, THAT'S a bottleneck. If they can scale the number of judges based on attendance, you'd think they could engineer a similar scaling for results entry/verification.

Nats was very well run. And, I really like the staff who worked in the reporting "pit." I'm just recommending some areas I think could be steamlined a bit. That's all.

 

[DukeFireBird]

Steve, you do have some good ideas for a possible TOM upgrade. email POP with your concerns. Im sure something may be done to help with the "bottleneck" issue.

Also consider we had alot of games in Masters go to time, and I had one that went 15 minutes after time was called due to extensions and a 1v1 prize scenerio. Not much you can do at that point.

 

[meganium45]

1. Pre-Tournament Announcements
The Tournament Organizer must announce the details of a tournament at the beginning of the event.
This includes the number of rounds that will be played, the number of players who will participate in the
Single Elimination rounds (if the event style is Swiss plus Single Elimination), how many players will
receive prizes, and other information pertinent to the operation of the event.

2. Approved Tournament Styles
Sanctioned Pokémon TCG tournaments may only be run as Swiss, Single Elimination, or Swiss plus
Single Elimination events. Other tournament styles may be run but may not be sanctioned without prior
approval by Pokémon Organized Play.

2.1. Swiss
The intent of the Swiss pairing method is to determine a single winner by pairing players with
the same, or similar, match record against each other until there is only one undefeated player.
(Please note that, with drops, it is possible for the winner of a Swiss tournament to have lost one
or more matches—i.e., if the undefeated player drops.)

There's your real answer, POP will arbitrarily choose to violate whatever rule it wants.

OK, I am as confused as anyone here.

What was the point of this?

Every tournament has its natural schedule that must be accomodated. Time constraints and other issues.

Would you have preferred they cap their attendance, as they announced that they would, or that they allow everyone to play and they be given flexibility as needed?

I don't think any change they made modified any outcomes to a great extent.

Would have been much more of an uproar had they NOT made a few certain changes.

Amazing...when they do it right, they still get complaints.

Vince

 

[Lawman]

@SteveP: As a MAs judge, I had a timer on me at all times. Many times, at the end of the rd, I left my timer running to see how long the turnaround was. Most rds hit 1 hr and 5 mins or so. That is 25 mins after the rd ends (40 min rds) to enter all the data, wait on time ext. matches and SDs. I'd say that is a great turnaround for an event with 700 players (MAs) and 2 computers. (1 each pod)

Keith

 

[Chairman Kaga]

I can certainly understand the need to "control" the timeline. Nevertheless, I don't understand why rounds take so long at Nats. Isn't there a way to streamline the process? It doesn't seem right that it takes 45 minutes after one round ends before the next round starts.

If the bottleneck is data entry, why not develop an offline interface where you could have multiple people entering match results, then upload the results? If the tournament software is the bottleneck, then perhaps some software engineering changes will help. :smile:

Most of the delays between rounds were due to overtime matches and time extensions, not due to any logistics issue.

We had one tied game in Seniors that took close to 30 minutes after time was called, another round where deck check issues caused a game to not even start until under 10 minutes remaining in the round, and I personally had to deal with a medical emergency (diabetic child having insulin issues) that resulted in a 30 minute extension.

And that was just the Seniors....

2.1. Swiss
The intent of the Swiss pairing method is to determine a single winner by pairing players with
the same, or similar, match record against each other until there is only one undefeated player.
(Please note that, with drops, it is possible for the winner of a Swiss tournament to have lost one
or more matches—i.e., if the undefeated player drops.)

There's your real answer, POP will arbitrarily choose to violate whatever rule it wants.

Except they also flighted it, which tosses your quoted section out the window for the most part. It seems like you're making negative comments for the sole purpose of making negative comments.

 

[PokePop]

We had one tied game in Seniors that took close to 30 minutes after time was called, another round where deck check issues caused a game to not even start until under 10 minutes remaining in the round, and I personally had to deal with a medical emergency (diabetic child having insulin issues) that resulted in a 30 minute extension.

And that was just the Seniors....

I kept track of the overtime in that round.
We had a 30 minute extension, a 35 minute extension, and a 25 minute extension in that round!
We finished the round, with all matches complete, 17 minutes after the round's normal end.
Not bad for the issues we had that round!

 

[Pidgeotto Trainer]

I've skimmed over most of this but I just want to say it was a great decision to change it to 2/3. If anything, I think making it 1 hour instead of 45 minutes would've been nice. Only a half hour more, it wouldn't add to the inbetween time. So close to having the same rules/time of any other top cut.

 

[Banette EX]

My goodness, why do players with success in the game always complain about something when something dosen't go their way, I mean really,play the game, and get over yourselves sometimes." Oh My, They changed the tournament after I dropped, what happens to the people who you beat don't make top because you dropped? How you messed up their rankings or chances of winning the whole thing. You didn't even mention that once.

Its alot of crybabies in Masters than there are in Juniors, and their 11 and below.

 

[edwarpy]

Except they also flighted it, which tosses your quoted section out the window for the most part. It seems like you're making negative comments for the sole purpose of making negative comments.

I could be wrong with my math, but I think 256+ players needs 9 Swiss rounds to leave 1 undefeated, in accordance with their guidelines. I was just pointing out POP will, in practice, bend the rules if they want. I made no judgement on the matter, just tempering the 'it is written' post before me.

DukeFireBird pointed out that POP has their loophole clause. Of course it's well within their right even without it to do what they want.

The extra top cut changes the tournament dynamic considerably. Top players have an easier than normal round 9 matchup but with infinitely bigger risk. Bottom players have a harder than normal matchup with increased reward.

It doesn't really matter to me either way regarding the shortened Swiss, but I do think changing the format of the round mid-stream was cheap, especially if it impacted a player's tournament strategy.

 

[yoyofsho16]

We had one tied game in Seniors that took close to 30 minutes after time was called, another round where deck check issues caused a game to not even start until under 10 minutes remaining in the round, and I personally had to deal with a medical emergency (diabetic child having insulin issues) that resulted in a 30 minute extension.

That was Juniors, it was Noah L's top 64 (32 maybe?) game. Unless there was another really long one I didn't see. But that game was CRAZY, went like AGES over time limit.

 

[Martin]

My goodness, why do players with success in the game always complain about something when something dosen't go their way, I mean really,play the game, and get over yourselves sometimes." Oh My, They changed the tournament after I dropped, what happens to the people who you beat don't make top because you dropped? How you messed up their rankings or chances of winning the whole thing. You didn't even mention that once.

Its alot of crybabies in Masters than there are in Juniors, and their 11 and below.

Actually me dropping helps the players I beat resistance wise as I left the tournament with no losses.

 

[ryanvergel]

Their opp. win percentage for martin would be a solid 100% lol

 

[Chairman Kaga]

That was Juniors, it was Noah L's top 64 (32 maybe?) game. Unless there was another really long one I didn't see. But that game was CRAZY, went like AGES over time limit.

We had one during Swiss in Seniors as well, I think it might have been round 5. That's why the Seniors tables were pretty much empty for half an hour. I recall the natives getting quite restless -- "why haven't they posted the new pairings?"

Their opp. win percentage for martin would be a solid 100% lol

If a player drops, their win percentage is forced to a maximum of 75% for figuring all opponent's win tiebreakers (Tournament Operation Procedures, 2.1.5.1).

 

[SteveP]

Actually me dropping helps the players I beat resistance wise as I left the tournament with no losses.

Nope. Like Chairman Kaga pointed out, you gave them a 75% resistance, not 100%, which is still pretty good though. The 4th round player you beat (Adrian from Colorado) went 5-3 in the tournament. I'm sure your 75% resistance helped him finished at #58 in his pod, eventually being eliminated in Top 16.

 

[Jaeger]

I've skimmed over most of this but I just want to say it was a great decision to change it to 2/3. If anything, I think making it 1 hour instead of 45 minutes would've been nice. Only a half hour more, it wouldn't add to the inbetween time. So close to having the same rules/time of any other top cut.

That 15 min probably would have changed at least 6-7 people in the final top 32.