Summary of the different "Strikes" formats?

So regular strikes are 0-0-X-X for 4p, 0-X-X for 3p, and 0-X for 2p

What are “fair” strikes and “progressive” strikes for each of the player counts?

0-1-2-3 / 0-1-2 / 0-1

0-1-1-2 / 0-1-2 / 0-2

1 Like

I ran simulations for:


I can do anything, but those seemed the most popular.

1 Like

Thanks for the info, fellas! Definitely learning a lot from here.

Do you have a similar program for two-player 0-1 strike formats? I’m trying to build an argument on why I feel Group Fair-Strike is better than Head-to-Head Strikes and being able to run simulations to show some data would be helpful.


Nevermind! I found the updated V2 .exe in another thread:

Playing with it now. Thanks for this!

These (2p and 3p groups) have also already been analyzed for tgp purposes:

But if you’re wondering how long matches are, etc. then yeah that’s not on the website, though I do have that data. The data can be pretty shocking, and @pinwizj (et al?) did a good job in smoothing it out I think.

Ppl who have played in both formats. Any thoughts or preferences?

I prefer progressive strikes. My reason is that I think it evens the spread the best.

Yes. Especially when having 3 player groups.

Fair strikes might be the best though. Haven’t ran any yet.

I prefer Progressive because every finishing position is worth something, but Fair isn’t too different. They’re both so much better than regular knockouts.

Just make sure you have a rule in place for the final 2 players so you don’t end up with a crazy long battle at the end. I like to manually add the same number of strikes to both players so that the player with more strikes is in a must win situation.


  • 9 strike progressive
  • Player A has 6 strikes
  • Player B has 3 strikes
  • Manually add 2 strikes to both players

This maintains the competitive advantage earned by Player B but makes it much less likely to drag on. I’ve had good results with it so far.


Yeah I like that rule too for when it gets down to two players if that scenario occurs. Thanks for the feedback!

@pinwizj is this still allowed in 5.5?

It’s fine to do, but it does move the event out of following the TGP Guide.

It would be graded on actual meaningful games played manually.

1 Like

Really, it significantly increases Player B’s advantage. Player B now only needs to win 1 of 4 games, instead of 3 out of 8.

Using Fair Strikes obviates the need for special rules/strike adjustments, since the loser of a two-player match receives 2 strikes.

And, as the name suggests, it’s fairer: it removes the huge advantage given to the smaller group(s) in a round when using Progressive.

What about this situation in fair strikes?

  • Player A has 8 strikes
  • Player B has 7 strikes

The one strike advantage for Player B has become meaningless at this point, which doesn’t feel very “fair”.

Edit to add:

I actually like this aspect of progressive. When using Swiss groupings, the 3 player groups are at the bottom, and fewer strikes to go around helps keep those players in the mix longer.


Yeah, that’s an odd quirk of Fair Strikes. Your last strike is much more valuable than your second-to-last strike. But that applies to everyone; I don’t think it’s inherently unfair.

This does lead to situations where some players who have three strikes to give are in a 3-player group, while other players on the same number of strikes are in a 4-player group. Some players are facing the prospect of immediate elimination, while others aren’t, based on sheer randomness.

What are thoughts on this Hybrid Progressive / Finals with Fair Strikes Approach?
Progressive Strikes - Players get 8/9 strikes - 3,2,1,0

Option 1
All 2 player groups are Fair Strikes - 0,2

Option 2
Just final 2 players left are Fair Strikes 0,2

I do this currently but only when it’s down to the final 2. It’s pretty rare when we have only 5 players left for more than a round.