rigour6 Posted November 17, 2005 Report Share Posted November 17, 2005 I begin by apologizing if this suggestion has been made before. Let us consider a 15 pairs unclocked tourney. The software will advance teams just as soon as it can. The first 2 tables to finish will move on right away, then the next two, and so on. When there are three tables left playing the first round, the first two of those three will have to wait for the third. The result of this is that the fast finish faster and the slow finish slower. Things would be a little more even if it was reversed. With an odd number of tables, make the fastest 2 wait for a third table, then move all 3 along, then in pairs the rest of the way. The fastest wouldn't finish quite so fast, but the tourney as a whole would finish faster. This seems to be what happens in unclocked Indy tourneys. If you have 10 tables, they will move 4/3/3, not 3/3/4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uday Posted November 17, 2005 Report Share Posted November 17, 2005 The grouping varies with size of the section. In theory the slow tables start losing boards to A-- and won't be allowed to fall too far behind. I dont mind making slow players wait for each other, i dont think i like the idea of making fast players wait Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.