danalan wrote:Actually, I think that brandonfici should make the decision based upon whatever criteria he wants. He changed the rules at the beginning of round 3 without explanation, so he's free to change them again if he likes. It's his tournament, after all.colson wrote:danalan wrote:brandoncfi wrote:Looks like the votes are even as of right now...I"ll keep the pool open until the first batch of final games have been sent...A tie vote will keep the scoring the same.
What the hell, might as well change the rules, again.
Shouldn't only those participating in the finals be aloud to vote since it only effects them.
Clearly the scoring of the tournament was flawed, allowing Psilotum to 'game the system' and advance without really playing. The rule change in round 3 might have been put in place to fix this flaw, but it's hard to overlook the fact that the change increased brandoncfi's odds of making round 4 without affecting the status of Psilotum's advancement.
The rule change did prevent a strategy I was trying to implement in round 3, so I suppose it worked to ensure that the best players advance, rather than whoever had the best strategy in the tournament. It has been educational, for sure. I think that any tournament that awards advancement based upon scoring of some sort, rather than purely rewarding the winner, is open to this type of strategic gameplay.
unfortunately the rule change before round three does benefit me...although I am doing everything in my power to win the 2nd spot in my group so this won't create a conflict of interest