• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Pools Only format - works and is faster than double elimination bracket

FerrishTheFish

Smash Ace
Joined
May 22, 2011
Messages
633
Location
Hyrule Honeymoon
I said a week, but I got bored and I love programming, so here is the console app version (C++) with some primitive error handling. Copy-paste it into your favorite environment. Hell, OS, stick it in the OP if you feel like it.
I still want $20 for the Java version :grin:

[COLLAPSE="Pools Only C++"]#include <iostream>
using namespace std;

int gcd(int,int); // Finds the greatest common divisor

int main()
{
int n, // Total number of players
x, // Number of paid players
y, // Ideal number of R2 players
p, // Number of R1 pools
m, // Number of players per R1 pool
a, // Number of players who advance per R1 pool
j; // Number of pools with extra player(s)
char s = 'N';

cout << "How many total players? ";
cin >> n;
cout << "How many paid players? ";
cin >> x;

n = abs(n); // Handles negative numbers
x = abs(x);
y = x;

while (y*2 <= n) // Find the largest value of y less than n
{
y = y*2;
}

if (y == n) // If the largest value of y is n,
{
cout << "\nYou have an ideal number of players.\n\n";
}
else
{
do
{
int pools = 1, // Initialize local variables
men = n,
adv = 0;

p = 1; // Set or reset global variables
m = n;
a = 0;

for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) // Check every possible pool configuration
{
pools = gcd((n-i),y);
men = n/pools;
adv = y/pools;
// Save the best configuration
if (men < m && men > 2 && adv != men && adv != 1)
{
m = men;
p = pools;
a = adv;
}
}

j = n - (n/p)*p; // Calculate the "extra" players

cout << "\nIdeal number of R2 players: " << y << endl << endl;
cout << n << " players in " << p << " pools of " << m << " players each (" << j << " with " << m+1 << " players), top " << a << " advance: ";
cout << y << " players remain." << endl;
cout << "\nIs this acceptable? (Y/N) ";
cin >> s;

if (s != 'Y' && s != 'y')
{
y = y/2;
}
}while (s != 'Y' && s != 'y' && y != x/2);
}

if (y == x/2)
{
cout << "\nYou are impossible to please!\n\n";
}

system("PAUSE");

return 0;
}

int gcd(int a,int b)
{
if (a == b)
{
return a;
}
else if (a > b)
{
return gcd((a-b),a);
}
else
{
return gcd(a,(b-a));
}
}[/COLLAPSE]##!!IMPORTANT!!##
When it's done with its calculations, the program will ask you, "Is this acceptable? (Y/N)"
There are TWO circumstances in which you should type in "N":

1) If the program tells you that zero players should advance per pool, OR
2) If the program tells you to make really big pools.

The first is a fail-safe. For the non-programmers out there, I tell the computer that zero players should advance from round 1, and I only allow the program to change that number if it finds something better than 1 gigantic pool with everybody in it.

The second is just kind of common sense.
 

dettadeus

Smash Lord
Joined
Nov 13, 2010
Messages
1,954
Location
drowning in pixels
Alright, tried this out today with Brawl singles and doubles. We messed around with Doubles and added a couple more awkward rounds in since we finished really fast.

Doubles:
-14 sets, 5 teams. One pool of 5, then top seed waited in Grand Finals while other four played again in a single-elimination bracket for second seed, then first and second played again in Grand Finals. Top 2 got paid 80/20 split.
Singles:
-38 sets, 14 entrants. Two pools of 5 + one pool of 4, top 2 get out, then two pools of 3, top 2 get out, then one pool of 4 and top 3 get paid.

We had 3 setups and finished in about 6 hours.

I really liked it, and it seemed a lot of other people who were playing liked it as well. Like 2/3rds of the entrants play low tiers, so getting to play more matches was really good.
 

Nicholas1024

Smash Lord
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
1,075
This thread is awesome. Great work as always, OS. I might have to steal this idea if I ever run my own tournament...
 

Luigi player

Smash Master
Joined
Jul 29, 2004
Messages
4,106
Location
Austria
I'd love a round robin/pool only tourney, but it's impossible to take less time than a double el. bracket.... especially the more people are at a tourney. :/ Could take days and would be REALLY exhausting too.
 

Overswarm

is laughing at you
Joined
May 4, 2005
Messages
21,181
I'd love a round robin/pool only tourney, but it's impossible to take less time than a double el. bracket.... especially the more people are at a tourney. :/ Could take days and would be REALLY exhausting too.
What? Are you high? That's what this thread is about. It takes waaaaaaay less time. Multiple people have contacted me telling me that their 30 man tournaments were finishing at 7 or 8 p.m. and it was DAYLIGHT outside.

It's faster.
 

Luigi player

Smash Master
Joined
Jul 29, 2004
Messages
4,106
Location
Austria
What? Are you high? That's what this thread is about. It takes waaaaaaay less time. Multiple people have contacted me telling me that their 30 man tournaments were finishing at 7 or 8 p.m. and it was DAYLIGHT outside.

It's faster.
Playing 1000 sets is faster than playing 90 sets... makes sense yeah.
 

salaboB

Smash Champion
Joined
Nov 16, 2002
Messages
2,136
Playing 1000 sets is faster than playing 90 sets... makes sense yeah.
Back to the original post!

So anyway, I'll use my tournament as an example with 31 people.

I want to cut it in half, so I want 15 people assuming I can easily cut this down to the amount of slots I'm paying out to (top 6).

5 pools of 6 (one of 7)- top 3 advance
3 pools of 5 - top 2 advance
1 pool of 6 - play for placements
Luigi player: Let's knock it down to 30 players as you said (This just means we remove the one pool of 7, making it 5 pools of 6 rather than 5 pools with four being 6 and one being 7 -- that's 30 (Or 31 in his example) total if you're not bothering to do the math yourself, Overswarm just worded it a little funny).

So 5 pools of 6 = 6!/(2!4!) = 15 per pool, 5 pools = 75.
3 pools of 5 = 5!/(2!3!) = 10 per pool, 3 pools = 30.
1 pool of 6 = 6!/(2!/4!) = 15 for the finals.

1000? Try 120, and the wait between the matches is reduced with this setup so it's easier to get them in.

120 faster versus 90 slower, I can see the 120 winning.
 

-LzR-

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
7,649
Location
Finland
I hosted a tourney using this system this weekend. It was well received, but had a few annoying things.

There are situations where you already know you passed or didn't get to the next round and still have to play matches. What if people don't care anymore and start giving free wins to someone else to make their placing easier? I know I should just DQ in that case, but how do I control it?
 

Overswarm

is laughing at you
Joined
May 4, 2005
Messages
21,181
I hosted a tourney using this system this weekend. It was well received, but had a few annoying things.

There are situations where you already know you passed or didn't get to the next round and still have to play matches. What if people don't care anymore and start giving free wins to someone else to make their placing easier? I know I should just DQ in that case, but how do I control it?
You DQ, then tell them don't bother coming back to anymore tournaments.
 

-LzR-

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
7,649
Location
Finland
All right that sounds harsh, but I guess that's the only way. Glad no one here did that, they just noted out the possibility to abuse it.
Anyways, this is a fantastic system and will probably replace double elimination bracket from Finland in the future. There were only little complaining from people who didn't know what they were talking about. It was about an hour or 2 faster than usual too.
 

STEM

Smash Cadet
Joined
May 7, 2012
Messages
37
Location
Scotch Plains, NJ
I'm not quite understanding how you get the people in round 2 pools.
Let's say you get 3 people out of eachpool in round 1
And assume that 2nd round has pools of 6 (2 1st seeds, 2 2nd seeds, 2 3rd seeds)
Do you randomly pick 2 1st seeds, 2nd seeds, and 3rd seeds, barring any repeats of the previous pool?

:phone:
 

-LzR-

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
7,649
Location
Finland
What I did was make sure there are as few people facing each other again as possible so everyone would have an interesting pool. I also balanced out the pools so the other one wasn't filled with those who got 1st seed and so on. Shouldn't be too complicated.
 

KishPrime

King of the Ship of Fools
BRoomer
Joined
Jun 22, 2003
Messages
7,739
Location
Indiana
If I can just chime in real fast with some thoughts:

1. You should never advance only 2 from a pool if at all possible, thanks to the potential for a 3-way tie at 1 loss. Eliminating someone with the best record in the pool is a rough thing to justify - rounds are a nice tiebreaker in some cases but not for this situation.
2. Going all-pools leads to a ton of rematches. Rematches within the same tournament are not very preferable - it waters down the importance of each set. At FC this week, we did a double-elim bracket with the last 32 INTO an 8-person RR, and used continuation sets for anyone that played during the bracket. It worked well - there were only about 2-4 sets in it that had started during the bracket.

That's all.
 

Luigi player

Smash Master
Joined
Jul 29, 2004
Messages
4,106
Location
Austria
Back to the original post!


Luigi player: Let's knock it down to 30 players as you said (This just means we remove the one pool of 7, making it 5 pools of 6 rather than 5 pools with four being 6 and one being 7 -- that's 30 (Or 31 in his example) total if you're not bothering to do the math yourself, Overswarm just worded it a little funny).

So 5 pools of 6 = 6!/(2!4!) = 15 per pool, 5 pools = 75.
3 pools of 5 = 5!/(2!3!) = 10 per pool, 3 pools = 30.
1 pool of 6 = 6!/(2!/4!) = 15 for the finals.

1000? Try 120, and the wait between the matches is reduced with this setup so it's easier to get them in.

120 faster versus 90 slower, I can see the 120 winning.
lzr was right I didnt read much so I assumed it was just one giant pool which would mean much more sets... I also obviously pulled my previous numbers out of my ***

but anyway, 30 people with 5 pools of 6 and top 3 advancing (to make a 16 man bracket with 15 entrants) would have 103-104 sets.

so pools format could be faster if you have A LOT of tvs since people know who they have to fight sooner, but the more entrants/less tvs you have the bigger the difference will be... small/small-medium tourneys can pull it off I guess.
 

Tesh

Smash Hero
Joined
Oct 28, 2008
Messages
9,737
Location
TX
Dang I'd really like this +YOLO (or OSF) together, but thats probably asking too much of the community.
 

Tesh

Smash Hero
Joined
Oct 28, 2008
Messages
9,737
Location
TX
Yea, it doesn't look hopeful. I like watching it alot more than standard competitive play, but most people prefer watching people ***** out a stock lead in this game...

Also with Apex coming up, I think non-japan rulesets are going to dwindle and disappear. If we lose, its proof japan's ruleset is best. If we win, its because USA focused on japanese ruleset alot this year.
 

-LzR-

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
7,649
Location
Finland
Well as a prominent host in Finland and pretty liberal, I don't think we have that problem. It's just that if the majority of the community wants it, I have no choice but to do it. It's a shame to live in a place like this when all the cool stuff is on America.
 

Ralph Cecil

Smash Champion
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
2,416
Location
Somewhere in KY QQQQQQQQQQ
NNID
RalphCecil
3DS FC
4098-4850-8033
Yea, it doesn't look hopeful. I like watching it alot more than standard competitive play, but most people prefer watching people ***** out a stock lead in this game...

Also with Apex coming up, I think non-japan rulesets are going to dwindle and disappear. If we lose, its proof japan's ruleset is best. If we win, its because USA focused on japanese ruleset alot this year.
So if we lose the Japanese Ruleset is the best. If we win the Japanese ruleset is the best lol? :o Also isn't their wfi god-like? I would think that would be a really nice factor. o-o
 

-LzR-

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
7,649
Location
Finland
No their Wifi isn't. I think Finland is (or at least used to be) second to Japan in terms of connection and I get the blue, minimum lag all the time and it's still pretty bad.
 

Tesh

Smash Hero
Joined
Oct 28, 2008
Messages
9,737
Location
TX
honestly, godlike wifi would be amazing in the U.S.A.

Because we like money and if everyone could get strong blue connections across the country we would do serious business online tournaments for cash and it would be amazing...cept for cheaters.
 

-LzR-

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
7,649
Location
Finland
Oh yeah let's get ontopic: I will gladly remove the hype of Grand Finals for a much better and faster tournament that requires a lot less dumb managing from me so I can actually play some friendlies along the way.
 

Juushichi

sugoi ~ sugoi ~
Joined
Dec 8, 2009
Messages
5,518
Location
Columbus, Ohio
If only @lly vs 9B is supposed to be the most hype for GF, I would love to see... @lly vs MtooK vs Niaroo vs Neitono vs whoever vs whoever at the end.
 

#HBC | Ryker

Netplay Monstrosity
BRoomer
Joined
Sep 16, 2008
Messages
6,520
Location
Mobile, AL
I have rethought my stance on hype GF. An eight man round robin (assuming top eight pay-outs) that has a series of hype matches would be amazing at a national.
 

Overswarm

is laughing at you
Joined
May 4, 2005
Messages
21,181
If I can just chime in real fast with some thoughts:

1. You should never advance only 2 from a pool if at all possible, thanks to the potential for a 3-way tie at 1 loss. Eliminating someone with the best record in the pool is a rough thing to justify - rounds are a nice tiebreaker in some cases but not for this situation.
2. Going all-pools leads to a ton of rematches. Rematches within the same tournament are not very preferable - it waters down the importance of each set. At FC this week, we did a double-elim bracket with the last 32 INTO an 8-person RR, and used continuation sets for anyone that played during the bracket. It worked well - there were only about 2-4 sets in it that had started during the bracket.

That's all.
I agree with the "2 from pool" stuff but I just accept it as a harsh reality at local-sized events. It really depends on setups.

As for rematches, I love 'em. Continuation sets might work well, haven't tried 'em, but rematches themselves have always been great. Probably my favorite part of pools. Not en masse, but just having that one guy show up in a later pool... that's fun.
 

-LzR-

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
7,649
Location
Finland
But what about useless sets? I mean when the 2 people who will pass are already decided and your set doesn't make any difference between you guys no matter how it goes. They should still just play it? How can they be motivated to do so? That was one of only complains I got.
 

STEM

Smash Cadet
Joined
May 7, 2012
Messages
37
Location
Scotch Plains, NJ
Seeding for the next pool?
Also playing to just get better...I don't understand why people wouldn't try their best to get even better

:phone:
 

-LzR-

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
7,649
Location
Finland
Well I mean sure, I even had one of those sets, I was stuck in the 4th place on my own pool and the other guy was stuck at 3rd place and our set was the last one and it couldn't have made any difference either way. I still tried to beat him as it was kind of a personal achievement but this is still a minor problem imo.
 

SoulPech

Smash Master
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
4,387
Location
Columbus/ NW Ohio
Well I mean sure, I even had one of those sets, I was stuck in the 4th place on my own pool and the other guy was stuck at 3rd place and our set was the last one and it couldn't have made any difference either way. I still tried to beat him as it was kind of a personal achievement but this is still a minor problem imo.
Then it wouldn't effect anything if you were guaranteed 4th and the other guy was guaranteed 3rd. If you had one of those wonky sets where you beat 2nd place guy, but he beats the 3rd place guy, then it would matter. It also effects if there were an amateur bracket/pool which determined seeding.

:phone:
 

-LzR-

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
7,649
Location
Finland
Well I guess people here don't mind and still play because of their personal rivarly stuff. Hopefully I don't have to do anything about it yet. I just love Pools Only. It makes it much easier for the TO as well.
 
Top Bottom