I went to a store champ on the weekend. 15 players 3 preliminary rounds then top 4 elimination

each round 1 person had a bye. 2 out of 3 three people with bye's made top 4 because of a win a loss and a bye. a lot of the tournament players where well matched so mainly modified wins.

in my opinion a person who had a win and a modified win should make top 4 over a person with a win and a bye and a loss.

i only had one win with 2 loses ( opponents had modified wins )

So you want to punish byes. Got it.

if there are bye's then maybe a minimum of 4 rounds?

The number of rounds should be determined by the number of players. Take the total number of players and see how many times you have to divide it until you get one. So (1)15/2=7.5, (2)7.5/2= 3.75, (3) 3.75/2= 1.875. 15 players should play 3 rounds of Swiss as the result should have one lone unbeaten person with a chance of two. At 16 players it's four rounds. Where the pairing was mess up, the players getting by the byes should have been from the bottom of the bracket ( minus the first round) one player who had one his first match should have been paired down. The Swiss System Tournament has been around since the late 1800's and is used in a far more competitive arena Chess. You may be unhappy by the results for two reasons, 1) your own personal record at the event 2) the TO did not apply the Swiss rounds correctly. Did the TO use a computer software to run the Swiss pairing and point calculations? Did they show the strength of schedule for the tie breakers?

The number of rounds should be determined by the number of players. Take the total number of players and see how many times you have to divide it until you get one. So (1)15/2=7.5, (2)7.5/2= 3.75, (3) 3.75/2= 1.875. 15 players should play 3 rounds of Swiss as the result should have one lone unbeaten person with a chance of two. At 16 players it's four rounds. Where the pairing was mess up, the players getting by the byes should have been from the bottom of the bracket ( minus the first round) one player who had one his first match should have been paired down. The Swiss System Tournament has been around since the late 1800's and is used in a far more competitive arena Chess. You may be unhappy by the results for two reasons, 1) your own personal record at the event 2) the TO did not apply the Swiss rounds correctly. Did the TO use a computer software to run the Swiss pairing and point calculations? Did they show the strength of schedule for the tie breakers?

On that final note regarding computer programs to run the numbers, is there an official computer program for running X-Wing events? I come from a Magic: the Gathering Background and there has always been DCI Reporter to run the event and make the pairings based on resistance (or in the case of X-Wing Strength of Schedule).

Would be good to know as I am trying to help the locate Game store to get up and running with some regular events.

I did the pairings for my Store Championship. FFG's formula for rankings via match points, and SOS, is fairly easy. No computer is necessary. But I like the math stuff.

I'm curious at how long the rounds were. We were doing 75 minute rounds, and after the first round, partial wins dropped dramatically. I only had one partial win out of 4 games. If you are only able to fit 60 minute rounds, I can easily see where FFG's system seems broken.

But as it is, byes are already penalize pretty heftily in their SOS. If you get the bye, you will end up at the bottom of whatever grouping of match points you are in. It may seem unfair (I came in behind someone with a bye as well, and I played 4 games), but it is also unfair to knock someone out of the tournament just because you have an odd amount of people.

Houseofholden.net/xwing/app/Xwing.HTML has a web based Swiss round calculator. I've also got a .exe from a place where it's geared towards x-wing. They're out there just keep hunting. If I can find a the place I got he other one from Ill post it.

I went to a store champ on the weekend. 15 players 3 preliminary rounds then top 4 elimination

each round 1 person had a bye. 2 out of 3 three people with bye's made top 4 because of a win a loss and a bye. a lot of the tournament players where well matched so mainly modified wins.

in my opinion a person who had a win and a modified win should make top 4 over a person with a win and a bye and a loss.

i only had one win with 2 loses ( opponents had modified wins )

Also, as Osoroshii points out, another contributing factor here is that you played fewer rounds than would have been ideal; byes are worth more in tournaments with very few rounds.

i dont know how he formulated it but it was a bye, loss, win and a loss bye win that made top 4

it was 75 minute rounds. i was happy the way i went. both my losses went to time and the oponent only got a modified win because one soontir would not die and a falcon flying round the edges also would not die

was a great day of x-wing i was just scratching my head how top 4 2 of them had bye games

I've been hurt by the system myself plenty. I do not agree with it. Yet I have yet to think of one better other then double elimination.

The number of rounds should be determined by the number of players. Take the total number of players and see how many times you have to divide it until you get one. So (1)15/2=7.5, (2)7.5/2= 3.75, (3) 3.75/2= 1.875. 15 players should play 3 rounds of Swiss as the result should have one lone unbeaten person with a chance of two. At 16 players it's four rounds. Where the pairing was mess up, the players getting by the byes should have been from the bottom of the bracket ( minus the first round) one player who had one his first match should have been paired down. The Swiss System Tournament has been around since the late 1800's and is used in a far more competitive arena Chess. You may be unhappy by the results for two reasons, 1) your own personal record at the event 2) the TO did not apply the Swiss rounds correctly. Did the TO use a computer software to run the Swiss pairing and point calculations? Did they show the strength of schedule for the tie breakers?

On that final note regarding computer programs to run the numbers, is there an official computer program for running X-Wing events? I come from a Magic: the Gathering Background and there has always been DCI Reporter to run the event and make the pairings based on resistance (or in the case of X-Wing Strength of Schedule).

Would be good to know as I am trying to help the locate Game store to get up and running with some regular events.

I don't know if this is what your looking for, but I just found this...

http://www.mediafire.com/download/il51dsm5ldspx1d/SWSwiss2.0.4.zip

Cheers

Simple, just play 6 rounds for a 64 player tournament. You lose, you are eliminated. The only Bye then is when they say goodBYE to you.

Let me know, how that works because I have no interest in hanging out for 6 rounds of play.

we in germany had a local store touarnement and we ussed swiss rules and in my opinion they arent broken

it worked perfect for all and we had a programm that calculated the points lost and shot and so the pairings came up after the first randomized round.

loss 0 points , modified win 3 points if u have 33 points difference then 5 points, total win 5 points it worked well and yeah there u go i love that swiss rules thing well i won the touarnement cause i had in the first round a modified win with 3 pointts. 3 others lost and 3 won so we had 3 groups

the fights were splitt in 3 games first game 1v1. 2nd game a 1v1 random scenario and we had this aestroid run thing from a forum were the stones moved !!! and they moved towards me !!! 3rd game was again a regular 1v1. well cause of 8 players 3 games are ok.and each game had time limit of 75 minutes.

group A the ones with total win 5 points

Group B the ones with modified wins ( me only )

Group C the ones with 0 points

i had to face my feared foe in a scenario mission game well i won but veeeeeeery lucky in the end.

we had no bye`s cause of the even numbers but with uneven numbers its normal that someone gets a bye u should try to get even player numbers for better and exact pairings.

in the end i had 13 points

1 modified win and 2 total wins

Simple, just play 6 rounds for a 64 player tournament. You lose, you are eliminated. The only Bye then is when they say goodBYE to you.

Let me know, how that works because I have no interest in hanging out for 6 rounds of play.

Single-elimination tournaments are not good, particularly when (as in X-wing) the brackets are randomly seeded.

Simple, just play 6 rounds for a 64 player tournament. You lose, you are eliminated. The only Bye then is when they say goodBYE to you.

Let me know, how that works because I have no interest in hanging out for 6 rounds of play.

Single-elimination tournaments are not good, particularly when (as in X-wing) the brackets are randomly seeded.

Add in the luck of the dice, and a single elim. tournament is not a good fit.

The Swiss System broke because it was improperly used. 15 players requires 4 rounds of Swiss.

The Swiss System broke because it was improperly used. 15 players requires 4 rounds of Swiss.

Yeah as far as I know you would only play 3 rounds of Swiss if there were 8 or fewer participants. It jumps to 4 rounds if you have between 9 and 16 players. 5 rounds would accommodate a group of 17-32.

If you have a finite period of time it appears you would need to adjust your length of rounds. So if you need 4 rounds you may need to stick with 60 minutes per round to get them in.

3 rounds x 75 min = 225 minutes (3.75 hours)

4 rounds x 60 min = 240 minutes (4 hours)

Time can be tight particularly when you have store hours to respect. When you plan a tournament you have to figure some of these details out and be flexible to make it run correctly.

For instance, we have a GSC this upcoming weekend it is tentatively scheduled for four 75 min rounds (we should certainly have the minimum 9 players for that). If we get a good turn out and have 17 or more then it will have to switch to five 60 minute rounds. It's 300 minutes / 6 hoirs of game play either way with a little extra to account for pairings and set up but it's the only way to make it work and run it correctly.

It's disappointing to see so many events scheduled in a way that does not allow them to be properly run.

The easiest way to break up the ties on points to determine standings is as such: if player A and player B have the same points after the Swiss rounds are over add up the points of all their opponents.

A: 2wins 1modified win would have 13pts

B: 2 wins 1modified win would have 13pts

we now look back to break this tie

A's opponents look like this:

C: 1win 1modifiedwin 1lose = 8pts

D: 1win 2lose = 5

E: 1win 1modifiedwin 1lose = 8pts

This gives A a strength of schedule of 21

B's opponents look like this:

F: 3lose = 0pts

G: 1modified win 2lose = 3 pts

H: 2win 1lose = 10pts

This gives B a strength of schedule of 13

So since A and B have the same pts at 13, A would be determined higher in ranking then B based on SoS. This is how FFG breaks ties in the tournament setting. So by this method having a bye means the same as facing an opponent who never wins a game, they add no points to the SoS. If these players with byes tied points in the end with another player their SoS most often will leave them out of the playoff rounds. Like wise if the any player they faced drops no more points are earned by them improving the SoS. This is by far the fairest way to handle Swiss System Tournaments.

The Swiss-system tournament is in use for more than 100 years. If it were broken, don't you think chess players would have invented a better system during all those years?

The Swiss-system tournament is in use for more than 100 years. If it were broken, don't you think chess players would have invented a better system during all those years?

The Swiss-System is also not designed around a non-binary scoring system where a Win is worth 3 or 5 points. So It does have it's issues in this game, though the issue here was that the correct number of rounds was not played.

The Swiss-System is also not designed around a non-binary scoring system where a Win is worth 3 or 5 points.

Chess is not exactly a binary scoring system either. You can score 1, 1/2 or 0 points.

So It does have it's issues in this game, though the issue here was that the correct number of rounds was not played.

That's the number or rounds required to get a clear winner. The OP is complaining about players making the top 4. If you want a clear difference between 4th and 5th place, how many rounds do you need for that?

Besides, chess tournaments with 200+ players and 7 rounds are not uncommon. And nobody complains about sharing the price money. You can have nice tournaments with less than the correct number of rounds.

The other system I have played in is where you use the points destroyed as primary tie-breaker not SoS. It helps with reducing the amount of exact ties on SoS. However, you run the risk of someone roflstomping their way through a few new players, but I think every system sorta has that.

On the plus side, a close loss is way more rewarding than a wipe out since it will add to your total tie breaker. Also, your tie-breaker is only reliant on how you do, so if you're first opponent drops out of the tourney, it doesn't royally screw over your SoS. The downside is there isn't a good way to track how difficult your opponents were, giving no bonus to facing the top tier players.

However, you do still have the problem of what to do with the Byes. Like the current method, you can have them get a full win (5pts), but they 0 bonus pts destroyed. Or you can have them gain the 'average' number of points destroyed by all players that round to give them a better chance.

i like the Swiss format but like someone pointed out it should have been 4 rounds, 3 rounds was broken a little.