I’m just going to take a different approach with my events and say there’s a $1 fee to play. If they don’t want to play, that’s fine. Your suggestion definitely seems doable though.
- Launched Match Play Ratings
- In match play tournaments only active rounds will be displayed by default. There’s a button to show completed rounds so you can check on old results, but this change should lead to a lot less scrolling in larger tournaments.
- Printed scoresheets now have an option to hide the “player order” column
Currently running the World Series here in Rhode Island. Ran into an interesting bug in the projector mode given the amount of strikes we have.
The standings give a numerical value for how many strikes someone has.
The big screen view shows all the individual “X” marks.
So many x’s! Can you add a comment here so I won’t forget to fix this when redoing the projector view: https://matchplay.uservoice.com/forums/595996-general/suggestions/18888619-revamp-big-screen-projector-view
If you start a best game tournament with 15 attempts, can you add more attempts while the tournament is running? Lets say, start with 15 and offer additional buy ins of 5 and 5 to achieve a max of 25 attempts?
You can’t change the tournament settings (beyond changing the name, date and other small details) after the tournaments has begun. I do want to audit everything and let TDs change settings that won’t affect scoring, but I haven’t gotten around to that yet.
It wouldn’t really help you anyway, I think? The tournament setting is for all players and you can’t bump the limit for a single player. Your best bet is to set the limit at 25 and use paper tickets or similar to keep track of entries.
Or use Karl’s DTM software for this tournament because it handles ticket management very well.
thanks for the quick response…
Can participants self queue like DTM?
Participants can self queue, but it’s generally speaking not as robust as DTM
Not that I like the format much but doesn’t MatchPlay support double elimination format?
MP does not support double elimination brackets. I’m about 2/3 done with an implementation, but I got sidetracked with this whole Match Play Ratings stuff. I will pick it up again shortly. Brackelope or Challonge are your best bets, I think.
I’m sure this has been covered in this massive thread, but if we’re running a tournament that uses between 5 and 10 rounds, do I just select the higher number and end the tournament early/don’t play the last “x” rounds?
we traditionally use brackelope but with the match play ratings now I wanted to make sure we get the data added
that’s how I do it for my tournaments when I have to, not sure there is another/better way?
Use Challonge for now. At this point there’s a much better chance that MP Ratings will be able to pick up Challonge data than Brackelope data. Use exact IFPA names in your tournament to ensure they can be matched up later
@Austin personally I leave “duration” as unlimited unless I have a reason to pick a specific number of rounds (e.g. I’m a forgetful person and might start one round too many)
COPY THAT. Thanks Andreas.
How does progressive strikes work with less than 4 players? The reason why I ask is I would want to avoid a situation where it is down to two people, and one has 3-4 strikes more than the other person, and it could possibly take more than a round or two.
I plan to run a 16 strike progressive tournament and I am trying to see how many rounds it could take.
So we had 18 people and it went 30 rounds. I had matchplay only picking our faster playing games for the most part to speed things up. We also made a decision (with the agreement of the players before hand) to award multiple strikes to the loser of each game when it was down the final two.
It still took a few rounds of just the final two to declare a winner, and we relied on pen and paper to keep track of strikes at that point. We still used matchplay for arena draws.
If we didn’t do this I think it could have gone a max of 11 more rounds if only 1 strike was awarded per loss.
Also we used swiss pairings to try and force the top of the field to give each other strikes throughout.
thanks for the feedback. 18-20 is about what I am expecting in a turnout, and this doesn’t seem like the best format for that. I think I will just stick with 3-4 strikes with bottom two getting strikes.
Timeframe depends a lot on how many strikes you have. We did 18 players and 12 strikes and it went 13 rounds: https://matchplay.events/live/99kq/standings
You get as many strikes as you get losses. So with two players, the loser gets 1 strike. With 3 players, 3rd place gets two strikes.
Definitely want to use swiss pairings for this format or you’ll be playing forever and ever.