Keith and Mike. NO ONE is suggesting draws in the single elimination. Its one heck of a straw man to suggest that they are.
I don't have an issue with banning draws in the last round of swiss to remove the perceived problem with IDs. I know it actually does very little to the standings at the end of the swiss so go ahead and ban draws in the last swiss round to fix the ID complaints.
A draw is less than a win. Players who draw early are less likely to make the cut than those who won that round. As a team tactic it is inferior to conceding to your fellow team mate as it makes it more likely that none of your team will make the cut.
Don't be deceived by the case where the team comprises the strongest players in the room and they make the cut. If they are the strongest players in the room then you should expect them to make the cut. Don't attribute their success to being able to ID in any round that they meet. Correlation is not causation.
Drawing to a friend in R3 or R4 of a seven round tournament is a big risk. We already have an issue where lots of X-2s don't make the cut. Two losses and a draw and you will be out. By taking a draw you will be more likely to play against players with a weaker win loss record, your tie breakers suffer as does those of your team mate. The R3/R4 ID only makes sense if you expect to win out in the remaining rounds which of course means that you would make the cut regardless, or if you actually don't care that strongly about securing a place in the cut.
The issue of IDs is emotive. As such it clouds everyones objectivity including mine. I believe that IDs actually cause minimal harm, less than other aspects of our game, but I'm not going to make the mistake of insisting that I'm right and everyone else who disagrees is wrong. I do believe that I have a solid objective case to why draws help tournament operation and can demonstrate by example that draws don't have the big impact claimed for them upon who makes the cut.
I urge anyone who wants their belief to be placed on firm ground to actually try out some tournaments in TOM. (use the vgc option to enable draws) I also urge you to think very carefully about the assumptions that you make. If you assume that player A is the best player in the room then don't be surprised when that player makes the cut.
---------- Post added 09/13/2010 at 10:17 AM ----------
Ian ...I do not see how IDs will make the final round shorter...I understand the top 2 tables ID and are done, but you still have the rest of the field playing...some trying to make the cut and others just to finish out the tourney.
The argument could be make that fewer matches in play can mean quicker rounds...but at 30+3 its going to go pretty fast
am I missing something simple here?
At smaller events the number of matches which go to sudden death do not really impact time that much...more time can be shaved off by quick turn around between rounds.
I don't believe that IDs make the final round shorter or any other round shorter. It is being able to assign a draw after the round has ended and not wait for a winner that shortens rounds. Note that because I do recognise the reasons why players and parents got upset over the top tables IDing I am perfectly happy to accept that draws in the final round of swiss are eliminated.
If 30+3 takes less time that 40+0 then it will be because players have fewer decisions to make during their turns. Fewer powers to play, less shuffling. My experience from magic is that the +5 takes a lot longer than the previous five turns. 30+3 also means that players will actually play fewer turns overall: it just got a bit harder for slower decks to win.
I agree that the time issue is a non problem at small events. Which of course is why much of Europe is able to use 45 minute matchplay in the swiss for the past several years. Even with the inevitable round overruns (more draws from maatchplay) our smaller events have fewer rounds to start with so there is frequently spare venue time to be filled
