[shevek]

I'm about to run a 2-session, 1-winner qualifying event with 2 sections.
Say it's 2 x 9 tables. I end up with 4 fields, 1 field playing NS twice, 1 play EW twice, 2 flip-flop.
Question: Do I also need to arrow-switch (1 round) in each session?

[gordontd]

shevek, on 2013-January-26, 20:43, said:

I'm about to run a 2-session, 1-winner qualifying event with 2 sections.
Say it's 2 x 9 tables. I end up with 4 fields, 1 field playing NS twice, 1 play EW twice, 2 flip-flop.
Question: Do I also need to arrow-switch (1 round) in each session?

I don't think it matters much either way if they are not playing all the other pairs, unless you intend having session prizes.

[campboy]

The movement isn't going to be particularly balanced whatever you do, but from my calculations arrow-switching does give a significant improvement.

[campboy]

I was in a hurry before and just looked at the numbers without really thinking what they meant.

In fact, arrow-switching this is obligatory because the movement without arrow-switching is actually a 2-winner movement in disguise. If line A plays the same direction as line B in one session and plays against them in the other (there will always be some choice of B for which this is the case) then in each session A and B combined must average 50%.

[bluejak]

It seems obvious to me to arrow-switch, since otherwise some pairs will never compete directly against others, and some pairs always will. Arrow-switching removes both never and always.

[shevek]

Thanks all

[shevek]

Here's a related matter.

If I have 18 tables, I can run separate NS & EW, swapping. Top 7 each way to final. That's easy & best.
However, not so good with an odd number, like 19.
If I swap fields, one pair (EW 10 say) plays the same pairs twice, a bit mean.
Other than running one field & arrow-switches, is there a way round this?

TIA

[Vampyr]

What's wrong with a single field?

[bluejak]

shevek, on 2013-January-27, 18:38, said:

Here's a related matter.

If I have 18 tables, I can run separate NS & EW, swapping. Top 7 each way to final. That's easy & best.
However, not so good with an odd number, like 19.
If I swap fields, one pair (EW 10 say) plays the same pairs twice, a bit mean.
Other than running one field & arrow-switches, is there a way round this?

TIA

Get round what? You have a simple method, easy to score, easy to run, relatively fair. Why do you want another way?