Daily challenge winner

Written by Don

By popular request the daily challenge winner will now be determined by a top 16 playoff. So even if you are not at the top of the leaderboard keep those matches going there are plenty of opportunities to earn yourself a spot.

Categories: Tournament Rules
Feb
14

5 Responses to “Daily challenge winner”

  1. Evil, PhD says:

    Should have also added….what’s wrong with a sixteen person bracket where the best records get seeded accordingly? Eliminate twenty games as a qualifier. Play the entire month. Install the swiss system to match players of similar win percentage (I think this takes time to write code that will do this) and then we don’t have players “ducking” the match, asymmetry due to random matches that give someone an easier slate of opponents, etc. Are we all THAT afraid of one another that drawing this up wouldn’t be a good thing?

  2. Evil, PhD says:

    Having won December tourney with 20-0 AND then playing a best of three against mleher, who also finished 20-0, I believe it is in the best interest of the tourney to have a bracket playoff. Or, remove the twenty and you’re done rule. I agree it is VERY difficult to do twenty straight. Witness there’s not been a repeat champ yet, so it is tough. But I think without a swiss system draw, 20 and done is not fair game. I’d prefer the competition. Just my 2 cents worth.

  3. mike b says:

    As I am currently one of a select few still at 100% this month I am okay with the the bracket, but I have to agree single loss elimination seems a little harsh. It would be a shame to finish 20-0 and then lose in the first round of the tournament because I got a bad batch of tiles in the game. While I’m definitely in favor of a top 16 tourney (especially because I would of been in it every month so far excluding the first) I think it should be implemented beginning in March or the tournament should be top 8 only best of 3 games. Just my thoughts but whatever is eventually decided upon I am okay with.

    MrRager15

  4. maariakhaleel says:

    I totally agree with Jcom any player who have 100% result should have edge over those who don’t…bcos it does require lots of skills to achieve it ..First of all there is no need of playoff if one has achieved 100% result but since many people are interested in it the playoff winner should face the player who has not lost single match and that too in 2/3 elimination it wil be more fair that way that is what i think decision is all yours

  5. Jcom10 says:

    Hi Don-

    I have made a comment in the past regarding players who win a significant number of games, but never get a chance at a championship. I suggested selecting the players who accrue either the highest winning percentage or the greatest number of games over a three month period, then have a unique tournament for those qualifiers. Or, maybe (this comment is self-serving, since I chose to compete in the monthly and not the daily this month), you can select the top five or six players in each of the last three or four months with some allowances and adjustments for repeat players (e.g., MAARIA, DEBBYOC, OPUS, etc).

    The idea that we would change the rules in the middle of this tournament goes strongly against my sense of fair play the expected consistency of follow-through. So, unless your suggested change is for future tournaments, with all due respect, I am strongly opposed to a change of rules in the middle of a game or tournament.

    Another thought is that, like the first tournament, Opus61 was declared the winner, then, as a separate tournament. There was, not a playoff, but a round of sixteen tournament. I would hate to see someone like DEBBYOC win the tournament according to the stated rules, only to lose it in the playoff.