Backgammon Online

29-Aug-2013
21:43 PST

House Tourneys take a very long time to end so one of the purposes to join Champ Tourney was to finish up things quickly  
We have not yet entered in knock out stage of our Tourney 2 & 3....So guys pz.....................

29-Aug-2013
21:48 PST

@lilwarrior

pz ask every1 to mention their current ZE rankings also as rankings are imp for tie breakers  


PS: personally i think one with the lower ranking should advance  
as he/she has defeated a player of higher caliber than him/her in their bw games  

29-Aug-2013
22:48 PST

http://zooescape.com/forum-thread.pl?home=4&th=338&gp=3714#p3714


and a clarification... Knockout stage of T2 has begun  

03-Sep-2013
08:44 PST

We have our final 8 contestants! And we cut the time to knockouts from 12 weeks in TC2 to 7 weeks in TC3, a 5 week improvement, which is the good news. We still ended up with 7 unfinished matches and had 9 different contestants that didn't finish all of their matches, which is the bad news. 8 of those 9 were out of the running, which may be one explanation for some lack of urgency on their part to finish their matches, although there are other issues like vacations and time zones as well. That's something for future hosts to ponder. The top 8 stayed the same from the original deadline to the extended deadline except for 1 person, and that was me. Due to the cut-offs at the deadline where we followed KK's suggestions and dropped people off one by one based on the number of unfinished matches, I dropped from 8th to 9th place. We started with eagle, who had 3 unfinished matches, and then we dropped 3 contestants that had 2 unfinished matches (jwc, valleyrivergirl, and Capricorn). All of their matches were dropped as well and the net result was I finished 9th and Oldman is in the playoffs.

So here it is, quarter finals start with matches to 7 points!

#1 KK vs #8 Uahskr
#2 Achilles vs # 7 Oldman
#3 Zulu vs. #6 Steelerhead
#4 Pada vs. #5 Cailleach

Have at it folks and Good Luck!

03-Sep-2013
08:50 PST

We had 4 people tied for 5th place, so here is how that tie was broken:

Oldman beat Uahskr 5-4 and Steeler 5-2

Uahskr beat Steeler 5-4.

Steeler beat Cail 5-1

Cail beat Oldman 8-3 and Uahskr 6-2

Do the chart with point differentials and:

Cail had +5
Steeler was at 0
Oldman was at -1
Uahskr was at -4

03-Sep-2013
09:26 PST

Thanks to all for a great spirit in this tournament and for making my job very easy in this tournament as the host. That, I feel is the greatest improvement from TC2. There were zero major issues and that speaks well of all of you.

Areas for improvement now:

1. Figure out a good time frame and deadline - We had 7 weeks and yet 9 people didn't finish their matches. TC2 took 12 weeks to actually finish all of the matches. Didn't want to wait 12 weeks, but somehow, I have a feeling it would have taken 9-11 weeks to finish all of the matches.

2. Figure out how to handle unfinished matches - KK had another suggestion and that was instead of deleting all of the matches for the unfinished players, just give both opponents credit for a loss in all unfinished matches. For what it's worth, I would have finished in 8th place using this method.

3. Figure out how to handle tie-breakers - KK just expanded the playoffs in TC2 for everyone that finished tied for 8th place with the top 4 getting a bye. I used the point differential to break the 4 way tie for 5th place in TC3, which I like because it factors in the cube.

Any other ideas?

03-Sep-2013
10:52 PST

First of all thank you for hosting T3. Great job!! I think most, if not all, of the issues we had in T2 have been effectively resolved. Following is just my 2 cents regarding Abriscoe's call for comments on his "Areas for Improvement:"

1. A 7-8 week time frame seems about right for getting through the Round Robin portion of a T. That would mean that people would need to finish about 3-4 matches per week to avoid being removed from the T (assuming we have the same number of players as in T3). I do think if a host decides to have a deadline it should be enforced as per the rules that the host states. Otherwise, there is really no need to have a deadline. It should be each player's responsibility to determine whether or not they can adhere to all of the rules (including deadlines imposed by the host) BEFORE signing up for a particular T, or be prepared to suffer any consequences that are stated in the rules by the host (e.g., removal from the T if you don't complete your matches by x date). On the other hand, if there is a longer deadline (or no deadline) stated in the rules that would encourage people who have less time to enter a T, and give people who like faster Ts the opportunity to wait until a faster T came along (or host a T themselves).

2. I suggest we stick to how the vote came out on how to handle unfinished matches after a deadline had passed (even though I was a minority opinion), or, have another vote with KK's new idea as another choice. That said, I think the host of each T should have the latitude to decide ALL of the rules for their own T and then it is up to the players to decide if they can play under the rules that the host publishes on KK's website. The important thing will be for each host to clearly state their rules beforehand (just as Abriscoe did in T3) so that each player can decide before a T begins if they will be able to adhere to the host's rules.

3. The way tiebreakers were handled in T3 seems fair to me.

Again, just my 2 cents. I look forward to reading what my fellow players have to say about how to improve things for everyone who enjoys playing in these kinds of Ts. Thanks again to Abriscoe and KK for a great T3. You guys really did do a stellar job serving all of us!