Double Elimination Tournament Next Year (for McCoy)

[flades]

I didn't used to be, but I'm totally with McCoy on this one now.

I think one of the smaller events next year (under 15-20 teams) needs to try this out...make EVERY game meaningful while still providing all teams with 3-4 games

Understand that it is tough for large events logistically to do this because of all the games but a tourney like Austin would have been perfect to try it out

[Typod]

Sign me up for that.

[Kickbot]

+1

[chipadelphia]

Would it be pool play leading into double elim basically?

[Typod]

Doubt you could do pool play and double elim in one day

[chipadelphia]

That's what I was thinking but how would you get the 3-4 games per team?

[Trey it Up]

If you do double-elimination for a tournament, you don't do pool play. It guarantees a minimum of three games for every team. I think it should strongly be considered for CC next year.

[Typod]

If you do double-elimination for a tournament, you don't do pool play. It guarantees a minimum of three games for every team. I think it should strongly be considered for CC next year.

Where would an 0-2 team get their third game?

[Trey it Up]

Playing another 0-2 team to see who came in last place.

[JimmyB]

The likely-hood of teams sticking around to play it out for last or second to last place is slim. You could possibly do one random draw warm-up game for everyone to get the kinks out. Or to place/seed teams.

Looking at having a circuit event here (jax) in sept. some time, and if some of the northeast or west coast teams will commit to coming, we can look at that format.

[Trey it Up]

Teams that go 0-2 and 0-3 stick around as it is now to play their last game when they could just as easily go home. I don't see why they would opt out of playing kickball games against evenly matched squads when they have a very high probability of leaving with a win.

[AD-ROCK]

Teams that go 0-2 and 0-3 stick around as it is now to play their last game when they could just as easily go home. I don't see why they would opt out of playing kickball games against evenly matched squads when they have a very high probability of leaving with a win.

That's a good point but the way the format is now a 1-2 or 1-3 team may make it out of pool play so there is something riding on that game.

[McCoy]

I love it!

[JellyDogg]

You could possibly do one random draw warm-up game for everyone to get the kinks out.

I think this would be the best.

[2_easy]

I am good with a double elimination tourney during the course of the year; as long as the matchups are via random draw. Unless it is the CC at the end of the year. Then rankings should be used.

[Lost_Sage]

For what it's worth, I am all for adding both elite pool and double-elimination to the possible types of formats from which Event Managers can choose.

If these options are ultimately adopted by the Rules Committee after our public comment period, we'll make sure that the rules governing ranking the teams (and the guidelines about awarding points) accommodate an EM's choice of one of these formats.

[McCoy]

Double elimination should be random draw or maybe 4 seeds and random draw.

[flades]

Double elimination should be random draw or maybe 4 seeds and random draw.

agreed. seed 4 teams and then random draw...don't think you want to do complete blind draw

could even do the draw on the podcast and have an "NCAA selection" show type of program

[AD-ROCK]

Double elimination should be random draw or maybe 4 seeds and random draw.

agreed. seed 4 teams and then random draw...don't think you want to do complete blind draw

could even do the draw on the podcast and have an "NCAA selection" show type of program

Racial Draft show type

[2_easy]

Double elimination should be random draw or maybe 4 seeds and random draw.

agreed. seed 4 teams and then random draw...don't think you want to do complete blind draw

could even do the draw on the podcast and have an "NCAA selection" show type of program

I think is should be a complete random draw.

[JohnPWilks]

If you do double-elimination for a tournament, you don't do pool play. It guarantees a minimum of three games for every team. I think it should strongly be considered for CC next year.

[Hollywood B]

Double elimination should be random draw or maybe 4 seeds and random draw.

agreed. seed 4 teams and then random draw...don't think you want to do complete blind draw

could even do the draw on the podcast and have an "NCAA selection" show type of program

I think is should be a complete random draw.

I agree double elimination should be completely random, even the top 4 should not get protection from one another in that format. Not for CC though. I like how teams earn their seedings over the course of the year.

[2_easy]

Double elimination should be random draw or maybe 4 seeds and random draw.

agreed. seed 4 teams and then random draw...don't think you want to do complete blind draw

could even do the draw on the podcast and have an "NCAA selection" show type of program

I think is should be a complete random draw.

I agree double elimination should be completely random, even the top 4 should not get protection from one another in that format. Not for CC though. I like how teams earn their seedings over the course of the year.

Exactly, CC is ranked no matter what format.

[Typod]

Double elimination should be random draw or maybe 4 seeds and random draw.

agreed. seed 4 teams and then random draw...don't think you want to do complete blind draw

could even do the draw on the podcast and have an "NCAA selection" show type of program

Draw it at the meet N greet. That would be interesting.

[changer banger]

Good luck to the administrative folks in figuring out the amount of Circuit points to award teams in such a format. Would be interesting to see how that shook out and how it would relate to the pool/elimination format point awards.

[KILF Hunter]

I am in favor of a double elimination.

Or a single elimination until a round robin with the final 4 teams left since essentially you could lose in pool play and still make the finals

[admin]

We need to add a clarification for Double Elimination Tournaments to our Rule Book, yes.

Admin

[The Slam]

After going to the Boston tournament let me just say - I don't think Double Elimination is the way to go (and I was all for it before).

Here's some of the cons:
- Nobody understands it. seriously, I can't even tell you how many people were confused and that was with 6 teams, I can't imagine how it would work with 20.
- Too much waiting around. You have to wait to see what teams lose/win other round games to figure out who you play next.
- You have no idea how many games you'll be playing. It could be 4, it could be 8, etc. This makes it especially hard when you have a limited amount of light/permit time. A tournament could end at 4 or could end at 7. It can potentially take a pretty long time for teams to get 2 losses.

[Justin]

Here is an example of the 3 game guarantee double elimination bracket. It allows the teams that lose in the first round of the losers bracket a chance to redeem themselves. I know some people might not like the idea of a team being able to lose their first 2 games and continue playing, but it does ad a different twist.

http://arsoftball.com/Brackets/3Game/12.pdf

[kim dude]

Teams that go 0-2 and 0-3 stick around as it is now to play their last game when they could just as easily go home. I don't see why they would opt out of playing kickball games against evenly matched squads when they have a very high probability of leaving with a win.

if you go 02 or 0.3 now your last game still usually means something. if nothing else you can ruin someone else's chance at getting out of pool play. playing for second to last place is just stupid

[McCoy]

Teams that go 0-2 and 0-3 stick around as it is now to play their last game when they could just as easily go home. I don't see why they would opt out of playing kickball games against evenly matched squads when they have a very high probability of leaving with a win.

if you go 02 or 0.3 now your last game still usually means something. if nothing else you can ruin someone else's chance at getting out of pool play. playing for second to last place is just stupid

letting a team that has 2 losses or 3 losses a chance to beat a team in single-elimination with no losses is stupid...making pool play stupid

[McCoy]

After going to the Boston tournament let me just say - I don't think Double Elimination is the way to go (and I was all for it before).

Here's some of the cons:
- Nobody understands it. seriously, I can't even tell you how many people were confused and that was with 6 teams, I can't imagine how it would work with 20.
- Too much waiting around. You have to wait to see what teams lose/win other round games to figure out who you play next.
- You have no idea how many games you'll be playing. It could be 4, it could be 8, etc. This makes it especially hard when you have a limited amount of light/permit time. A tournament could end at 4 or could end at 7. It can potentially take a pretty long time for teams to get 2 losses.

In double-elimination the brackets would be printed out beforehand and everybody would know where to go after each game. In a 16 team double-elimination bracket the winner of the winner's bracket would play four games in a row and then have a lunch break as the losers bracket catches up.

[Trey it Up]

Slam, it sounds like whoever ran that tournament did not know what they were doing. Double elimination is pretty easy. If you cannot figure it out you should not host a tournament with that format. There is no way the same tournament could end with 4 games or 8 games. Typically the winner will win either 7 or 8 games-- 7 games if they win out, or 8 games if they lose 1.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk

[JimmyB]

Slam, it sounds like whoever ran that tournament did not know what they were doing. Double elimination is pretty easy. If you cannot figure it out you should not host a tournament with that format. There is no way the same tournament could end with 4 games or 8 games. Typically the winner will win either 7 or 8 games-- 7 games if they win out, or 8 games if they lose 1.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk

That is simply not a true statement. The number of games is completely decided by a) when you lose, and b) how many teams are in the tournament.

Now, I'm not saying that should dictate whether or not to use this format, but IF you lose early, you could expect to play 2-4 more games than the team you meet in the finals.

[KaBoomBox]

Teams that go 0-2 and 0-3 stick around as it is now to play their last game when they could just as easily go home. I don't see why they would opt out of playing kickball games against evenly matched squads when they have a very high probability of leaving with a win.

if you go 02 or 0.3 now your last game still usually means something. if nothing else you can ruin someone else's chance at getting out of pool play. playing for second to last place is just stupid

letting a team that has 2 losses or 3 losses a chance to beat a team in single-elimination with no losses is stupid...making pool play stupid

we played the same team 3 times on Saturday. We beat them in pool play, beat them in the first round of the double elim, then faced them again for a third time in the loser's bracket semi-final and they beat us 2-0, bouncing us from the tourney. Getting eliminated by a team you beat twice in the same day was rough. I would say that situation is similar to a team having a terrible pool play but having the chance to pull things together and beat a top team in elims.

[The Slam]

Slam, it sounds like whoever ran that tournament did not know what they were doing. Double elimination is pretty easy. If you cannot figure it out you should not host a tournament with that format. There is no way the same tournament could end with 4 games or 8 games. Typically the winner will win either 7 or 8 games-- 7 games if they win out, or 8 games if they lose 1.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk

That is simply not a true statement. The number of games is completely decided by a) when you lose, and b) how many teams are in the tournament.

Now, I'm not saying that should dictate whether or not to use this format, but IF you lose early, you could expect to play 2-4 more games than the team you meet in the finals.

exactly, and this is why we had to keep waiting around. Teams that lost early ended up winning later.

[Trey it Up]

Please show me a scenario where are an 8 team bracket could end up with 1 finalists playing 4 more games than the other finalist. I'm pretty sure with an 8 team bracket, that the most a team could play is 2 more games than the other finalist.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk

[McCoy]

There shouldn't be pool play in a double-elim tourney. That's where this tournament went wrong in my opinion.

[JimmyB]

Please show me a scenario where are an 8 team bracket could end up with 1 finalists playing 4 more games than the other finalist. I'm pretty sure with an 8 team bracket, that the most a team could play is 2 more games than the other finalist.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk

Trey, please re-read my response.

You will notice that there was a 2 (TWO) in my "2-4 more games" comment. Of course that is on the low end, and only with 8 teams. How many more games would there end up being with a 24 team bracket?

[JimmyB]

There shouldn't be pool play in a double-elim tourney. That's where this tournament went wrong in my opinion.

No, there definitely should not be pool play. Maybe a random draw, single game to use as a warm-up, but not pool play.