Board
Teamleague Forum
posted at 2021-06-01 23:32 by smallblackcat
So we have 20 teams entered (assuming no late submissions). Please share your thoughts on section construction here. I'll keep this thread open until Friday 22:00.
To start things off, pchesso suggested a 4-6-6-4 split in the other thread. I'll note that that causes one player clash for mcstorytaller, but honestly that clash is going to be hard to avoid.
To start things off, pchesso suggested a 4-6-6-4 split in the other thread. I'll note that that causes one player clash for mcstorytaller, but honestly that clash is going to be hard to avoid.
posted at 2021-06-02 01:31 by KRMCHESS
Well I can switch round mcstorytaller so that issue can be resolved with him likely being switched with someone in Mysterious Pawn Moves. It's just that before changing teams it does help to have a rough idea of layout so I don't need to change them again once sections are up.
posted at 2021-06-02 02:25 by Turamon
4 6 6 4 looks good and fair to me considered the rating differences. please let's have finals in all sections nonetheless
posted at 2021-06-02 07:27 by prezandy
With the new updates to the Teams list, 4-6-6-4 is no longer possible, as now there are 7 teams falling into the range of 1936-2036.
posted at 2021-06-02 08:04 by pchesso
Yeah. Not to worry, though. Possible now e.g.
4-7-5-4 or
5-6-5-4
4-7-5-4 or
5-6-5-4
posted at 2021-06-02 16:46 by smallblackcat
We now have 21 teams with the addition of VirtualRed. There are some clear rating divides, so a 4-7-6-4 split seems quite reasonable to me.
please let's have finals in all sections nonetheless
I'm happy to do this if the consensus is in favour. I personally think it's a bit redundant in 4-team sections, but I am a man of the people and will submit to the collective will.
please let's have finals in all sections nonetheless
I'm happy to do this if the consensus is in favour. I personally think it's a bit redundant in 4-team sections, but I am a man of the people and will submit to the collective will.
posted at 2021-06-03 04:30 by KRMCHESS
4-7-6-4 seems reasonable to me. As far as finals go I don't have a firm opinion but happy to go along with the collective will.
posted at 2021-06-03 09:26 by Turamon
if we are not playing finals in the 4 teams sections what about this: first half pairings are as usual, second half board 1 plays against board 2, board 3 against board 4? otherwise it's kind of boring and repetive.
posted at 2021-06-03 12:18 by kurumim
Let's have playoffs for Fischer and Alekhine too, why not? As Spassky has 7 teams, it'll be an 8-9-week season anyway, plus with only 3 seasons this year it's best to get as many opportunities to play as possible.
I actually hadn't considered sbc's scheme of 4-7-6-4 when I learned there would be 21 teams, and I have to say it's the best solution we could have.
P.S.: As we'll have appreciable gaps between the sections, I'd suggest once again that the cap could be the top team's average + 20 points so as to keep the balance within each section.
I actually hadn't considered sbc's scheme of 4-7-6-4 when I learned there would be 21 teams, and I have to say it's the best solution we could have.
P.S.: As we'll have appreciable gaps between the sections, I'd suggest once again that the cap could be the top team's average + 20 points so as to keep the balance within each section.
posted at 2021-06-03 12:36 by danijelo
I would like playoff regardless the number of teams playing in it. Just for a info, i think one team for some reason is still not registered. I am expecting team poisoned pawns curare to play in tournament. Roster was ready not sure what went wrong. Still have not heard anything from my captain TGV but please take that into consideration. They should fall into one of last 2 sections.
posted at 2021-06-03 17:00 by smallblackcat
if we are not playing finals in the 4 teams sections what about this: first half pairings are as usual, second half board 1 plays against board 2, board 3 against board 4? otherwise it's kind of boring and repetive.
Can't be done without changes to teamleague code I'm afraid.
Sounds like no-one has an objection to finals in smaller sections, so I guess we'll have them.
P.S.: As we'll have appreciable gaps between the sections, I'd suggest once again that the cap could be the top team's average + 20 points so as to keep the balance within each section.
Yeah this seems like the way to go, and I mean as a general rule, not just for the current tourney.
I am expecting team poisoned pawns curare to play in tournament. Roster was ready not sure what went wrong. Still have not heard anything from my captain TGV but please take that into consideration. They should fall into one of last 2 sections.
Ok, I'll try to contact TGV to find out. I'm guessing we can make this work without disrupting sections too much.
Can't be done without changes to teamleague code I'm afraid.
Sounds like no-one has an objection to finals in smaller sections, so I guess we'll have them.
P.S.: As we'll have appreciable gaps between the sections, I'd suggest once again that the cap could be the top team's average + 20 points so as to keep the balance within each section.
Yeah this seems like the way to go, and I mean as a general rule, not just for the current tourney.
I am expecting team poisoned pawns curare to play in tournament. Roster was ready not sure what went wrong. Still have not heard anything from my captain TGV but please take that into consideration. They should fall into one of last 2 sections.
Ok, I'll try to contact TGV to find out. I'm guessing we can make this work without disrupting sections too much.
posted at 2021-06-03 18:18 by smallblackcat
Ok so we got an extra team, not sure what went wrong with the submission. I'm looking at a 4-7-6-5 split now, because that's where the significant rating gaps are.
posted at 2021-06-03 20:47 by kurumim
@sbc: Many times the Rangers had two similar-rated squads in the last section, so I guess you could just check with CactusJr if he has something up his sleeve at this point. Six teams is better than five and I don't see a problem in just asking.
In case there's no additional late entry, I'll simply endorse 4-7-6-5 because this time the rating gaps are super clear and screaming for that split.
In case there's no additional late entry, I'll simply endorse 4-7-6-5 because this time the rating gaps are super clear and screaming for that split.
posted at 2021-06-03 21:45 by smallblackcat
Ok, I'll check with CactusJr.
posted at 2021-06-04 19:09 by smallblackcat
Sections are up. We'll have playoffs in all sections, with one (minor) caveat: Alekhine is a 5-team section, so they will have 5 rounds of round-robin. The statutes then call for a position round (1st vs 2nd, 3rd vs 4th). I am proposing that that will be a de-facto playoff (i.e. 1st vs 2nd match is for the section title; 3rd vs 4th is a 3rd-place playoff). I hope that is broadly acceptable.
Additionally, it seems reasonable to have section wide byes ahead of playoffs in all sections other than Spassky, since then they will all run to a similar length (Alekhine is still a round shorter though).
Additionally, it seems reasonable to have section wide byes ahead of playoffs in all sections other than Spassky, since then they will all run to a similar length (Alekhine is still a round shorter though).
posted at 2021-06-04 20:14 by kurumim
Thank you once again for all your work on this, sbc!
Both 5 and 6-team sections feature five rounds, right? So Fischer would need only one bye to catch up with Spassky, whereas Kasparov and Alekhine would need two.
Both 5 and 6-team sections feature five rounds, right? So Fischer would need only one bye to catch up with Spassky, whereas Kasparov and Alekhine would need two.
posted at 2021-06-04 22:59 by smallblackcat
I guess we could have a section-wide bye mid-tourney for those sections, and then everyone has playoffs in round 8. Something like as follows:
Fischer: regular rounds 1-6, bye round 7, playoffs round 8
Spassky regular rounds 1-7, playoffs round 8
Kasparov, regular rounds 1-3, bye round 4, rounds 5-6, bye round 7, playoffs round 8
Alekhine, regular rounds 1-3, bye round 4, rounds 5-6, bye round 7, playoffs round 8
Fischer: regular rounds 1-6, bye round 7, playoffs round 8
Spassky regular rounds 1-7, playoffs round 8
Kasparov, regular rounds 1-3, bye round 4, rounds 5-6, bye round 7, playoffs round 8
Alekhine, regular rounds 1-3, bye round 4, rounds 5-6, bye round 7, playoffs round 8
posted at 2021-06-05 02:55 by prezandy
As Spassky contains 7 teams, then there should be 6 regular rounds, to my mind.
Or did I miss something?
Or did I miss something?
posted at 2021-06-05 03:52 by KRMCHESS
Well reason there are 7 rounds is that while each team plays 6 times during each round 1 team has a bye. So way pairings are done is with 8 teams but one team would be "Bye"
posted at 2021-06-05 04:30 by prezandy
Thanks, KRM!
posted at 2021-06-05 04:38 by kurumim
Looks perfect, sbc. :)
posted at 2021-06-06 19:11 by smallblackcat
Team pairings for all rounds are now done, and can be seen here: http://teamleague.org/LightNEasy.php?page=compschedule
By all means look them over if you are so inclined.
By all means look them over if you are so inclined.
posted at 2021-06-06 19:32 by marjohn
Welldone once more sbc!
Thank you
Thank you
posted at 2021-06-08 20:30 by pchesso
Three times NewBlood - RW in round 1 - in every section we're in. :D