[barmar]

 Phil, on 2017-January-04, 08:38, said:

#2 can be mitigated by a) BBO altering the (questionable?) rule that you cant start playing your own challenge or b) adding each other as a friend.

True. In the first challenge I tried adding all my group members as friends. They didn't add me back, so no go.

I consider my first point more significant. Why artificially split into groups when we can compete all together? If we make it a weeklong we can have plenty of boards so the results should be pretty accurate.

[Phil]

 barmar, on 2017-January-04, 08:42, said:

True. In the first challenge I tried adding all my group members as friends. They didn't add me back, so no go.

I consider my first point more significant. Why artificially split into groups when we can compete all together? If we make it a weeklong we can have plenty of boards so the results should be pretty accurate.

Are you thinking some giant RR? Or Swiss? Or just randomly playing available opponents?

[barmar]

 Phil, on 2017-January-04, 08:44, said:

Are you thinking some giant RR? Or Swiss? Or just randomly playing available opponents?

They're just like robot duplicate, except you don't have to play at the same time as everyone else. You can drop in and out any time, like the challenges. At the end, all the players are ranked. We'd then take the top 16 and they'd advance to the KO stage.

Play in one to see what they're like. We run 3 free daylong tourneys every day: MP, IMP, Total Points.

[cherdano]

I like the weeklong tournament. Could even be 2-week long as far as I am concerned.

[barmar]

 cherdano, on 2017-January-04, 09:12, said:

I like the weeklong tournament. Could even be 2-week long as far as I am concerned.

Maybe even scrap the whole KO stage, and just run a monthlong with hundreds of boards.

The problem with this is that we don't currently provide a way to see the running standings. I don't think players would like the idea of not knowing how they're doing for several weeks. We're planning on improvements to these tournament types. We've already run several multi-day survivor tourneys, where each day qualifies the top N% from the previous day. We're looking into adding carryover, like most multi-day F2F tournaments do.

[smerriman]

 barmar, on 2017-January-04, 10:21, said:

Maybe even scrap the whole KO stage, and just run a monthlong with hundreds of boards.

The problem with this is that we don't currently provide a way to see the running standings.

Could do multiple weeklongs, so you can see how you're doing each week. Carryover doesn't need to be 'built-in', since the averages can just be calculated manually.

Would it be possible to set this up in a way that everyone gets exactly the same hands, rather than the daylong where some people play different boards (or will that be automatic given we have < 100 players)? Creating multiple accounts to cheat isn't really going to be applicable here.

If so, this is pretty much the 'multiple player challenge' option discussed a while back. Seems like the perfect approach and much superior to a group stage (or, to be honest, even knockouts) - large numbers of boards, everyone plays the same ones so the luck factor is minimised, and proper MP strategy since you're playing against a field.

[cherdano]

Ah I misunderstood what daylong tournaments are. I'd be very much in favour if everyone plays the same hands; otherwise I'd be cautiously in favour.

[Phil]

 cherdano, on 2017-January-04, 17:26, said:

Ah I misunderstood what daylong tournaments are. I'd be very much in favour if everyone plays the same hands; otherwise I'd be cautiously in favour.

If Im not mistaken, the players get a set of boards from a black pool and get matchpointed against the others that play the same hands (but not the same set).

This is fine for matchpoints but a DEATH WISH for IMPs.

[stoppiello]

the idea of a weeklong tourney of say 64 hands to narrow the group down to a KO stage seems like it would be an interesting idea to try. If you were to run the whole event as a week-long 'daily' event, how many would the smallest tourney be? 8? 10? Seems that would be over in 2 tourneys, 3 at the most.

[ovncylmz]

One missing point, how will the MP be scored if we use group structure? MP average (a linear calculation) does not make sense to me.

[barmar]

 Phil, on 2017-January-04, 17:39, said:

If Im not mistaken, the players get a set of boards from a black pool and get matchpointed against the others that play the same hands (but not the same set).

We can set the deal pool size. For a small tourney like this we'll set it to 1, so everyone gets the same hands.

We had a holiday daylong tourney for yellows a couple of weeks ago and forgot to do this. There were only about 15 players, and most hands were only played 1 or 2 times.

Quote

This is fine for matchpoints but a DEATH WISH for IMPs.

The regular daylongs get around 6000 entries. Even at IMPs the use of deal pools is not really a killer for a tourney this size, since each hand is played hundreds of times. It's no worse than a Swiss Team or KO with hand-dealing, where each match is playing different boards (this is still the norm in ACBL team tourneys).

[gordontd]

 barmar, on 2017-January-04, 09:07, said:

Play in one to see what they're like. We run 3 free daylong tourneys every day: MP, IMP, Total Points.

I've had a look but I can't see them and search brings up no results. Where do we find them?

[stoppiello]

 gordontd, on 2017-January-05, 10:52, said:

I've had a look but I can't see them and search brings up no results. Where do we find them?

if you go under competetive tournaments, all tournaments, they're generally the top 2-3 on the list. The host would be BBO and the title is "Free Daylong Tournament (format will be in here, mp's, imps' or total points) then todays date registration numbers are in the thousands

[frank0]

OK so now I'm thinking of at least for 1 more event of similar structure (but MP, non-best hand), I'll probably start a different thread tomorrow for the registration of this event.

OTOH I as well as many others are considering a weeklong/monthlong tournament on BBO of similar structure we play here. I'm looking forward to that(and think eventually that should replace BBF challenge). Let's keep discussing this and give people who work for BBO some time.

 ovncylmz, on 2017-January-05, 09:24, said:

One missing point, how will the MP be scored if we use group structure? MP average (a linear calculation) does not make sense to me.

Isn't it how most BAM team score?

[frank0]

Registration start! Register at http://www.bridgebas...llenge-event-6/

[gordontd]

 stoppiello, on 2017-January-06, 08:50, said:

if you go under competetive tournaments, all tournaments, they're generally the top 2-3 on the list. The host would be BBO and the title is "Free Daylong Tournament (format will be in here, mp's, imps' or total points) then todays date registration numbers are in the thousands

Thanks for that - I wouldn't have found them otherwise. Have just played in two of them.

[ovncylmz]

 frank0, on 2017-January-06, 16:30, said:

OK so now I'm thinking of at least for 1 more event of similar structure (but MP, non-best hand), I'll probably start a different thread tomorrow for the registration of this event.

OTOH I as well as many others are considering a weeklong/monthlong tournament on BBO of similar structure we play here. I'm looking forward to that(and think eventually that should replace BBF challenge). Let's keep discussing this and give people who work for BBO some time.


Isn't it how most BAM team score?

It is, but:
a) no group structure, your score/standing is across the field (the comparison is against your opponent but you don't play 16 boards)
b) everybody plays the same boards (yes, you may still play flat boards against a weak team while others playing difficult boards)
c) you play it a session and then get your result (unless barometer with 2-3 board matches) -- 20-0 is somehow limiting the gain/damage but something like 15-1/16-0 is too big:)