The Championships - Polymorphic [Winner: Rodion]

by **mcshanester29** on Sun Aug 02, 2015 11:18 pm

So here is what I have for those advancing to the Round of 16:

1.agentcom 13 wins
2.Rodion 12 wins
3.Armandolas 11 wins
4.dkmaster 11 wins
5.Fyrdraca 11 wins
6.JBlombier 10 wins
7.jltile1 10 wins
8.MudPuppy 10 wins
9.shaneback 10 wins
10.*Pixar* 9 wins
11.Endgame422 9 wins
12.hmsps 9 wins
13.pearljamrox2 9 wins
14.Lord_Bremen 8 wins
15.schiballs 8 wins
16.osman76 8 wins

We had 4 players tie with 8 wins, the 1st tiebreaker can't be used as not everyone has a head to head games with each other in the tournament. So we go to the 2nd tiebreaker of starting 2nd in their games in this round.

These 4 player are tied with 8 wins
Lord_Bremen 8 wins - 6 games going 2nd
schiballs 8 wins - 5 games going 2nd
osman76 8 wins - 2 games going 2nd
iAmCaffeine 8 wins - 1 game going 2nd, unfortunately will not be advancing to the next round

I will give everyone a couple days to review and ask questions and then will send out the next round of games

by **Endgame422** on Sun Aug 02, 2015 11:35 pm

Is this the ranking for seedings going into the bracket phase as well?

by **iAmCaffeine** on Mon Aug 03, 2015 2:51 am

So the fact my record is better than all the others who got 8 wins that round means nothing? What a fucking joke.

by **Armandolas** on Mon Aug 03, 2015 3:57 am

iAmCaffeine wrote:So the fact my record is better than all the others who got 8 wins that round means nothing? What a fucking joke.

I did not have to time yet to see the records. But please let us know about your thoughts.

by **iAmCaffeine** on Mon Aug 03, 2015 4:49 am

Armandolas wrote:
iAmCaffeine wrote:So the fact my record is better than all the others who got 8 wins that round means nothing? What a fucking joke.

I did not have to time yet to see the records. But please let us know about your thoughts.

Out of the four of us who only scored eight in the last round, the records are:
iAmCaffeine - 18/29
Lord_Bremen - 17/29
osman76 - 14/29
schiballs - 13/29

Yet, because I went second less times than them in the last round, I'm getting eliminated. I would've thought maintaining a better record throughout the tournament demonstrates a higher level of skill than winning polymorphic games going second, especially when this particular tie-breaker is so map/drop/dice dependent. My record is actually better than three other players who are advancing because they scored higher in the last round, which may not be completely pertinent but just adds to the argument.

by **agentcom** on Mon Aug 03, 2015 8:13 am

The flip side, of course, is that your tournament wins came in earlier rounds when there was theoretically easier competition. When faced against the players of this round, you managed 8 wins; however, others did the same thing but with a tougher schedule. It's not completely illogical.

by **iAmCaffeine** on Mon Aug 03, 2015 10:07 am

agentcom wrote:The flip side, of course, is that your tournament wins came in earlier rounds when there was theoretically easier competition. When faced against the players of this round, you managed 8 wins; however, others did the same thing but with a tougher schedule. It's not completely illogical.

Except the people advancing before me in this situation got the same amount of wins as I did in this particular round. From there we're using a more luck based tie-breaker than others available.

by **Rodion** on Mon Aug 03, 2015 11:16 pm

mcshanester29 wrote:So here is what I have for those advancing to the Round of 16:

1.agentcom 13 wins
2.Rodion 12 wins
3.Armandolas 11 wins
4.dkmaster 11 wins
5.Fyrdraca 11 wins
6.JBlombier 10 wins
7.jltile1 10 wins
8.MudPuppy 10 wins
9.shaneback 10 wins
10.*Pixar* 9 wins
11.Endgame422 9 wins
12.hmsps 9 wins
13.pearljamrox2 9 wins
14.Lord_Bremen 8 wins
15.schiballs 8 wins
16.osman76 8 wins

We had 4 players tie with 8 wins, the 1st tiebreaker can't be used as not everyone has a head to head games with each other in the tournament. So we go to the 2nd tiebreaker of starting 2nd in their games in this round.

These 4 player are tied with 8 wins
Lord_Bremen 8 wins - 6 games going 2nd
schiballs 8 wins - 5 games going 2nd
osman76 8 wins - 2 games going 2nd
iAmCaffeine 8 wins - 1 game going 2nd, unfortunately will not be advancing to the next round

I will give everyone a couple days to review and ask questions and then will send out the next round of games

1 - I think that the procedure should be:
a) classify Lord_Bremen for more wins going second
b) check for h2h tiebreaker between the other 3 (schiballs, osman76 and iAmCaffeine)

c1) if h2h cannot be applied, classify schiballs for more wins going second
d1) check for h2h between osman76 and iAmCaffeine
e1) if h2h cannot be applied, classify osman76

c2) if h2h can be applied, classify whoever won it and then check for h2h between the next two (if no h2h applicable, revert to wins going second)

by **Rodion** on Mon Aug 03, 2015 11:31 pm

I just checked.

iAmCaffeine 1 x 0 schiballs
osman76 1 x 0 schiballs
iAmCaffeine 0 x 0 osman76

Read this, please.

http://www.quickscores.com/Orgs/Head-To ... reaker.pdf

That could lead to classifying osman76 first, then iAmCaffeine and eliminating schiballs (see page 4, right side of figure 4).

Or we could be using the "Variation #2 – Head-To-Head (all play)", which would refuse to use h2h since iAmCaffeine did not play osman76. In this case, schiballs advances for wins going second, then osman76 advances for the same criterium, eliminating iAmCaffeine (see page 7).

I think we might actually need a ruling on this one.

by **Rodion** on Mon Aug 03, 2015 11:43 pm

After that, a second issue could be that you seeded the remaining 16 considering only the performances of the last round, not the whole tournament. At this point, I don't mind and I just want to see the games rolling, but some people might complain.

A third issue is that, even by your chart, I do not think the ties are properly broken (for instance, if we are only considering the last round - which we shouldn't -, I believe Fyrdraca should be #3 and Armandolas should be #5).

by **iAmCaffeine** on Tue Aug 04, 2015 3:08 am

Pretty sure I played Lord_Bremen and beat him too.

by **Rodion** on Tue Aug 04, 2015 6:33 pm

I did not dispute the TO when he said h2h could not be applied for the 4 players. I just trusted him, so I classified Lord_Bremen and then went from there. But, yeah, I suppose you could include him and recalculate everything.

But that is useless if the ruling is in favor of the "h2h (all play)" system.

by **iAmCaffeine** on Wed Aug 05, 2015 6:38 am

iAmCaffeine 1 - 0 schiballs
iAmCaffeine 1 - 0 Lord_Bremen
iAmCaffeine 0 - 0 osman76 (not played)

schiballs 0 - 1 iAmCaffeine
schiballs 1 - 2 Lord_Bremen
schiballs 0 - 1 osman76

Lord_Bremen 0 - 1 iAmCaffeine
Lord_Bremen 2 - 1 schiballs
Lord_Bremen 0 - 0 osman76 (not played)

osman76 0 - 0 iAmCaffeine (not played)
osman76 1 - 0 schiballs
osman76 0 - Lord_Bremen (not played)

by **Rodion** on Wed Aug 05, 2015 11:53 pm

Please inform me concerning when games will be created as I need to renew my premium in advance.

by **jltile1** on Sun Aug 09, 2015 9:00 pm

So poly champion of 2016 right ?

by **mcshanester29** on Mon Aug 10, 2015 9:50 pm

Sorry guys was out of town for a few days.

The 1st h2h can not be applied equally to all of those tied so we automatically go down the list to the next tiebreaker and we do not go back to the first h2h tiebreaker.

I was just showing the seeding of wins for the last round and how the h2h breaks down I will be seeding for the whole tournament. Games will go out in the next couple days

by **iAmCaffeine** on Tue Aug 11, 2015 9:47 am

Oh well, more evidence that these Championships have a lot of amendments to be made before the next release.

by **mcshanester29** on Tue Aug 11, 2015 8:43 pm

iAmCaffeine wrote:Oh well, more evidence that these Championships have a lot of amendments to be made before the next release.

The tiebreaker rule has been followed the same way in each round, not just this one.

by **iAmCaffeine** on Wed Aug 12, 2015 3:40 am

mcshanester29 wrote:
iAmCaffeine wrote:Oh well, more evidence that these Championships have a lot of amendments to be made before the next release.

The tiebreaker rule has been followed the same way in each round, not just this one.

It's still a shit rule though. Going second means nothing out of context; the map, dice and drop all strongly affect whether going first is even an advantage or not. One would think playing better than the others involved in the tie-breaker would qualify that player ahead of the others, but apparently not.

by **mcshanester29** on Sat Aug 22, 2015 10:20 pm

iAmCaffeine wrote:
mcshanester29 wrote:
iAmCaffeine wrote:Oh well, more evidence that these Championships have a lot of amendments to be made before the next release.

The tiebreaker rule has been followed the same way in each round, not just this one.

It's still a shit rule though. Going second means nothing out of context; the map, dice and drop all strongly affect whether going first is even an advantage or not. One would think playing better than the others involved in the tie-breaker would qualify that player ahead of the others, but apparently not.

It would have if you would have played all of them for the first tiebreaker, but you didn't play one of them...If you don't like the rules don't join.

With more delay than planned Round 4 games have been sent out. Those who had games in groups with no shows were counted as wins to bring everyone's score up to the 43 games. I have the correct scores posted on the scoreboard, but there is no way I can manipulate the record part of it of the scoreboard. The remaining rounds will go a lot quicker. Thanks!!

by **agentcom** on Tue Aug 25, 2015 11:06 am

Thanks MC!

by **Endgame422** on Wed Aug 26, 2015 4:41 pm

Are we being paired at random or is there a true bracket?

by **mcshanester29** on Thu Aug 27, 2015 11:38 am

Endgame422 wrote:Are we being paired at random or is there a true bracket?

The first round you were seeded by scores, and then will go to a true bracket from there, I will have the bracket posted shortly

by **Endgame422** on Thu Aug 27, 2015 5:14 pm

Thanks boss.
Its appreciated.

by **Rodion** on Fri Aug 28, 2015 3:04 pm

Endgame422 wrote:Thanks boss.
Its appreciated.

Congratulations on advancing, by the way!

The Championships - Polymorphic [Winner: Rodion]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 3]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 3]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 3]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 3]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 3]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 3]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 3]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 3]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 3]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 3]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 3]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 3]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 3]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 3]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 3]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 3]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 3]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 3]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 3]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 3]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 4 (R16)]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 4 (R16)]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 4 (R16)]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 4 (R16)]

Re: The Championships - Polymorphic [Round 4 (R16)]

Who is online