Help
What are the optimum settings for these? There seem to be several options and if people have figured out what works best then I would appreciate learning what has worked for them rather than just going by guess and by golly. I had to learn the hard way that you need lots of tables for it to work at all. Thanks for any help!
Page 1 of 1
Survivor Tourneys
#2
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 667
- Joined: 2003-February-19
- Gender:Male
- Location:Germany
Posted 2016-March-09, 08:15
I suggest not to run survivor tourneys at all. It can always happen that you have several bad boards in the first round which are not your fault at all. It is embarrassing to be kicked out of the tourney in this situation.
Karl
Karl
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,220
- Joined: 2005-August-17
Posted 2016-March-14, 01:35
Too late already did and it seemed to be popular. but thanks for your input anyway:)
#4
- Group: Members
- Posts: 2
- Joined: 2012-August-15
Posted 2016-March-14, 10:34
I organize this kind of tournament - I think it is the most beautiful and interesting of all.
Sugestions:
- set minimum 8 rounds / 1 board each ;
- SURE if you have time .. the best tournament is 6-7 rounds with 2 boards each, total 12/14 bds, elimination after round 3-4-5-(6)
- set 0% first 2 rounds and increase to 5%, 10%, 15% , 20% each round after previous is done
- kibitz off
- minimum 7 min / board (preferable 8 min)
- alert all players about the number of tables in game now and about this... '' when the last table finished -and your partner is disconect- both are eliminated ''
Good luck !
Sugestions:
- set minimum 8 rounds / 1 board each ;
- SURE if you have time .. the best tournament is 6-7 rounds with 2 boards each, total 12/14 bds, elimination after round 3-4-5-(6)
- set 0% first 2 rounds and increase to 5%, 10%, 15% , 20% each round after previous is done
- kibitz off
- minimum 7 min / board (preferable 8 min)
- alert all players about the number of tables in game now and about this... '' when the last table finished -and your partner is disconect- both are eliminated ''
Good luck !
#5
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 320
- Joined: 2009-April-27
- Gender:Female
- Location:Germany, Bavaria
Posted 2016-March-14, 17:31
I prefer rounds with two boards to reduce the risk of one bad board dominating the result too much. Increasing the cut rate after round two or three is a nice idea when you want to play one-board-rounds.
The first cut will always take place after round two. So when playing one board per round it will be two boards that count and when you play two boards per round it will be four when the first cut takes place. When the cut is zero, no one will be excluded.
Survival with less than 5 rounds make little sense to me. Rounds with more than two boards neither if you don't play a very long tourney.
With a small number of tables or many boards per round you have to increase the cut to make the idea work. Else it might happen that in some rounds no one will be cut at all. The calculation must be a kind of cumulative but I don't know the exact formula.
A not too challenging setting that works good for me is 5 rounds with 2 boards each and cut about 15-20 % with 20 or more tables.
Most players love to win and survive. Those with bad results will be excluded in a survival tourney and that might be a benefit when the overall willingness to stay in a tourney until end is bad.
One of the problems is that pairs with one player disconnected or running will be eliminated at the end of the round. Most survival hosts explain that in round one or two that players have a chance to understand what happens and are not pissed of. Calling a sub to tables that finished the round and where the pair might be cut is not reasonable as such a cut might end in unpleasant discussions. So you better check the result. Sometimes I sub myself (with a second nick) to find out if the pair will survive and search a real sub in the new round in case the pair survived.
Give enough time (7 minutes per board) to finish the boards and maybe help slow tables by adjusting that no one has to wait too long. Some players try to benefit from stalling when the cut is near.
The first cut will always take place after round two. So when playing one board per round it will be two boards that count and when you play two boards per round it will be four when the first cut takes place. When the cut is zero, no one will be excluded.
Survival with less than 5 rounds make little sense to me. Rounds with more than two boards neither if you don't play a very long tourney.
With a small number of tables or many boards per round you have to increase the cut to make the idea work. Else it might happen that in some rounds no one will be cut at all. The calculation must be a kind of cumulative but I don't know the exact formula.
A not too challenging setting that works good for me is 5 rounds with 2 boards each and cut about 15-20 % with 20 or more tables.
Most players love to win and survive. Those with bad results will be excluded in a survival tourney and that might be a benefit when the overall willingness to stay in a tourney until end is bad.
One of the problems is that pairs with one player disconnected or running will be eliminated at the end of the round. Most survival hosts explain that in round one or two that players have a chance to understand what happens and are not pissed of. Calling a sub to tables that finished the round and where the pair might be cut is not reasonable as such a cut might end in unpleasant discussions. So you better check the result. Sometimes I sub myself (with a second nick) to find out if the pair will survive and search a real sub in the new round in case the pair survived.
Give enough time (7 minutes per board) to finish the boards and maybe help slow tables by adjusting that no one has to wait too long. Some players try to benefit from stalling when the cut is near.
Page 1 of 1