Tournament Seeding Procedures

Dormant threads from the high school sections are preserved here.
Locked
Tegan
Coach of AHAN Jr.
Posts: 1975
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 9:42 pm

Tournament Seeding Procedures

Post by Tegan »

I am getting ready to write an article addressing some problems in tournament seeding. I am wondering how other states do this?

In Illinois, tehre is no set procedure. The most common is "reputation" if you have been good in the past, some Hosts think you are always good, and you get an easier ride. If you have been bad, you are always bad, and you get heaved to the sharks.

Outside of the Chicago area, it is more common to run a single tournament, placing all of the "good" teams in one bracket, and the "other" teams in one bracket, thus at least a few "other" teams advacne until they are demolished.

My background is in athletic management, and as such, to me seeding should be based on a tangible record, or winning percentage, or strength of schedule, that is in writing to all coaches. As I got to thinking about it, I started to wonder if other states had a procedure to handle this.

jewtemplar
Rikku
Posts: 397
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 10:18 am
Location: Burke, VA
Contact:

Post by jewtemplar »

Swiss pair.

Tegan
Coach of AHAN Jr.
Posts: 1975
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 9:42 pm

Post by Tegan »

jewtemplar wrote:Swiss pair.
Ding! That sounds logical (I know a lot of tournament hosts around here would never do it......the New Trier Scholbol Solo comes the closest)

User avatar
cvdwightw
Auron
Posts: 3446
Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 12:46 am
Location: Southern CA
Contact:

Post by cvdwightw »

Most tournaments I've heard of are run using some kind of prelim rounds followed by playoff format, so I'm going to assume that's the case where you are. If you can't get tournament directors to even consider Swiss-pair style tournaments, I would urge you to look into evening out prelim brackets and then giving playoff seeds based on performance within the bracket. For example, if you had 16 teams, you could divide them into two brackets with initial "reputation" seeds (1, 4, 5, 8, 9, 12, 13, 16) and (2, 3, 6, 7, 10, 11, 14, 15), then give teams new seeds for playoffs in the form of A1, B1, A2, B2, A3, B3 and so on.

Like Swiss pair, this will allow for recalculation of "reputation" seeds for the next tournament so that if say team #12 sticks around for a while in the playoffs then they will have a higher seed in the next tournament. Where it falls short of Swiss pair is that Swiss pair also works for double and triple elimination tournaments, and typically (though not always) results in teams playing games against similar-strength teams by the end of the prelims/tournament.

STPickrell
Auron
Posts: 1501
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2003 11:12 pm
Location: Vienna, VA
Contact:

Post by STPickrell »

Ugh. I don't like the idea of travelling 2 hours to play two games. I'd want at least 5, and preferably 7.

Most TD's I've seen over the years either drew brackets randomly or try to separate the powers.
Shawn Pickrell, HSAPQ CFO

User avatar
rchschem
Yuna
Posts: 779
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 7:36 am
Location: Durham, NC

Post by rchschem »

As a player and coach I love the Swiss pair format, and someday I hope to run a tournament large enough to implement it. The Right Triangle Open has only drawn round robin audiences thus far.

I understand the "fairness" of the blind draw system, but randomness always introduces random problems, and mediocre teams can still be placed in a weak bracket, making them look at lot better (and vice-versa).

But I can't see how an initial reputation ranking format would ever work successfully, since we can't really judge the quality of the field at the tournaments. For instance, my team has won just about every NC tournament in the last three years, but the fields tend to be relatively weak (not a slam against NC; we're working on that). Unless, of course, we agree on some national standards for evaluating teams, maybe involving polls and computers...

Eric
Raleigh Charter

Tegan
Coach of AHAN Jr.
Posts: 1975
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 9:42 pm

Post by Tegan »

rchschem wrote: But I can't see how an initial reputation ranking format would ever work successfully, since we can't really judge the quality of the field at the tournaments. For instance, my team has won just about every NC tournament in the last three years, but the fields tend to be relatively weak (not a slam against NC; we're working on that). Unless, of course, we agree on some national standards for evaluating teams, maybe involving polls and computers...

Eric
Raleigh Charter
I'm not sure it would even be possible to do a national ranking. Even the national tournaments are incomplete. I saw a team that we beat (about 50-60 points) place in the top 20 at NAQT.....my guess is that there are always better teams out there. I see national rankings in high school sports, and see how they change from beginning to the end of the season.

In Illinois, we do seed the sectional tournaments (based on coaches vote) which lead to the state championship. I'm just trying to get ideas for local touranments......My team got a bit lucky this last week getting put into a pool that lacked the one or two best teams. A lot of other good teams got lumped into a pool and went home early, while one or two "not as good" teams advanced.

Seems like some more work needs to be done.

User avatar
rchschem
Yuna
Posts: 779
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 7:36 am
Location: Durham, NC

Post by rchschem »

I'm not sure it would even be possible to do a national ranking.
I wrote that as I was thinking about 12-0 Auburn getting hosed out of a shot at the BCS title.

Eric

Locked