Yo Dave!
Check out if I've got the correct set of pairings for the remaining
rounds of the top 3 divisions. top and 1500 should be correct (no
other way of doing it), but did I set it up correctly for the 1600
division? IE does the winner of the bessyboo/koos games get the bye
in the next round?
Let me know whether it's correct or not. If so, I'd like to complete the
remaining divisions. That would require you (or someone who knows!)
telling me what the series of byes are in the remaining rounds - I
can't figure that out myself.
It takes a lot less time if I can do this all at once, rather than piecing
it together slowly. And if I don't get it done over this weekend, it ain't
gonna get done for a very long time.....
Michael,
since Dave refers to your site to check that the pairings in the different groups for round 2 are consistent, can you answer me this
question, so that I and everybody understand how it is done:
My understanding is that in the top-group the pairing has been made (taking a bye as a match too):
winner match 1 against w/match 2 (match 1 was a bye)
winner match 3 against w/match 4
In the 1400 group, this looks similar
winner match 1 against w/match 2 (match 1 was a bye)
winner match 3 against w/match 4
winner match 5 against w/match 6
Is this how it has been done? Thanks.
Gilbert
Actually, I'm confused too!
I think you are right - and I assume Dave means the pairings will be
in order "down the page" in a grouping. I take it the current groupings
are "in order", ie there isn't going to be hopping around within a
division. This is simple enough if the number of players in a division is
a power of 2.
Where I'm confused is, when it's an odd number in a given round, who
gets the bye - top or bottom. I got the impression from Dave's posts
here that it switches between top ranked and bottom ranked between
rounds, but I'm not certain. The 1300 division, for instance, confuses
the daylights out of me, as it will have to have a series of byes. As I
understand it, winner in match 1 (me! hooray!) gets a bye this round.
Then the winner of the lowest round gets the bye in the next round?
And so forth - but I'm not certain - Dave needs to clarify that for me -
or us 🙂.
Part of the problem has been the scheme would be easier for dave to
draw than to verbally describe to me, so initially I was just waiting for
him to list the pairings each round, and then I'd add them. I also
know he/we didn't want to add the future pairings because people
would start games before they are supposed to - human nature in all
its enthusiasm, and that would have become a nightmare for Dave,
John, and the other TDs.
Unfortunately, life has gotten busy for me, so I no longer have time
to wait and work on the tables each round - it's much harder to edit
and modify the topology of the tables than it is to do them from
scratch. I have to build the topology by hand, which requires figuring
out which elements in a large html table have entries, or grey bars,
etc. Having only a protosimian level of intelligence, it takes me a long
time to edit this. Once the topology is there, life is easy - entering
new gameIDs into the tables only takes a minute, and updating game
results is automatic.
OK, I'm done whining!
any news yet, Michael? It seems it is very complicated.
The point is that not only the top group or the 1400 group second
round pairing is unclear (eufemism), but all other pairings for the
second round and the next rounds as well. At least for you and me.
Pairing for a round according to names rather than rules is
unacceptable, everybody will agree with that. So, they should be
published before the end of the previous round.