PDA

View Full Version : Brewfest and results in error



Geohen
09-24-2011, 11:46 PM
On 9/24/11 we held our brefest tournament and due to technical issues we had to hand calculate the tournament after the second round. We did a fantastic job according the the Crypto Tracker where we put in information as how we made the matches, by doing manual pairings. The issue being I got gipped. We did what we could without technical support there for causing a minor error as to who took second and who took third. After putting the match into the Crypto tracker the person who took on the first place player in the final took third due to tie breakers rather than myself taking on the first place contestant. Here is how the Crypto tracker posted results:
Player MW T1 T2 T3
1. George F: 4 +1 -7 25
2. Shaun B: 4 -1 +7 9
3. Brandt K: 4 -3 +9 1
4. Mike R: 3 -3 +13 17
5. Logan M: 2 +5 -3 45
6. James R: 2 +3 -3 38
7. Jeremy S: 2 +1 +9 29
8. Ben B: 2 +1 +5 21
9. Donald B: 2 +1 +1 35
10. Michael M: 0 +1 +5 55

This is a regular group there for I would like to hear some judges responses as to what is to happen due to the final pair not being properly calculated.

ashleegurl
09-24-2011, 11:49 PM
Given that this was a sanctioned tournament it appears that there is a bit of an integrity issue with the final results. Making it default to the proper resulting and needing to post that? Do you see the issue there?

Aaric
09-25-2011, 02:37 AM
You're issue is with tiebreakers not working out in your favor? It's fairly common when the only two undefeated players go up against each other in the last of the swiss rounds and the loser comes in third.

ashleegurl
09-25-2011, 06:48 AM
I am the second place player as listed above. I legitimately took second and for some reason the third place player went to the final. . .

Geohen
09-26-2011, 11:10 AM
Yeah so basically one of the visiting judges attempted to check the tiebreakers manually since the computer died and in his calculations he put George F and Brandt K as tied for the T1. In order to save having to do the T2 by hand a top 2 playoff was done. Come to find out once the info was put into the computer it was Shaun B who was in second place and he should have faced George in the top 2 playoffs. The mats haven't been given out as we are trying to sort out this mess, but I am not exactly sure what the proper procedure is. I just want to get this right.

Littlejon24
09-26-2011, 11:53 AM
is there any way to record all of the winners of each round and simply input it into tracker? as long as you have your pairings and the winners to those pairings, you can just input it into Tracker as an unsanctioned tournament and figure it out from there. if there was a mistake in the top 2, simply correct that mistake and have them play the match out.

correct me if im missing something

Speratus
09-26-2011, 12:48 PM
I was there at the tournament and would like to clairfy some points and shed my personal and professional opinion on the situation.

The laptop running the tournament software died after the first round and we decided to do the pairings by hand so we can continue the tournament. Jeremy and George did most of it, so I can't say anything with how they did it, but I trust their calculations.

We went to the final round, Brandt beat George, and then I believe they played a second game as a playoff type deal. Brandt won again, and it was decided that he had won. I realize that the results are not accurate with what we ruled at the time, but it is my opinion that it should stay as is. The reasoning for this is because we're playing for rewards, the mat, and we all agreed on Brandt being the winner of the tournament.
It seems very unfair to tell him that he has to play another game to keep his prize when it wasn't a player error, it was our error for not having a backup computer, and we all told him that he had won already, or even worse, take the mat away from him. If we were worried about the actual results, we shouldn't have made him or George play a second game and just told everybody that we'd determine the winners once George was able to find another computer. It was decided, and I think it's unprofessional to turn back on that decision.

Littlejon24
09-26-2011, 02:33 PM
if it was a unanimous decision then that pretty much settles it.

Geohen
09-26-2011, 03:49 PM
The issue is that we are now saying "Sorry dude I know you took second but our bad, you do not get credit for it." On top of that it states that records, in our case they are in paper form, should be held for six months in case of a dispute, which one has been brought up.

Aaric
09-26-2011, 03:52 PM
if it was a unanimous decision then that pretty much settles it.

Yar. But in regards to what Jon said in his other post in this thread, you can help prevent errors like this in the future by using match result slips, pairings lists, or if it's a small tournament, just jotting down on a piece of paper who beat who each round. Or you can charge the laptop battery before the tournament.

Geohen
09-26-2011, 04:11 PM
Yar. But in regards to what Jon said in his other post in this thread, you can help prevent errors like this in the future by using match result slips, pairings lists, or if it's a small tournament, just jotting down on a piece of paper who beat who each round. Or you can charge the laptop battery before the tournament.

All the information of the matches and their results were written on paper, which I still have.

Speratus
09-26-2011, 09:11 PM
The issue is that we are now saying "Sorry dude I know you took second but our bad, you do not get credit for it." On top of that it states that records, in our case they are in paper form, should be held for six months in case of a dispute, which one has been brought up.

You're right and it sucks, but the fact of the matter is that is not how we decided parings were at the tournament. Think of it this way, if you were at NACC and through tiebreakers, you won a bunch of prizes, went home thinking you had won then get a call from Crypt saying "whoops, slight miscalculation, you won't be getting any prizes and actually you didn't win at all. Our bad" you'd be pissed and it'd be terribly unprofessional. You'd now have a bad taste in your mouth every time you ran a tournament with them.

Same thing here in my opinion. If Shaun, you, Jeremy or anybody else there thought the results were incorrect in any way, it should have been brought up and declaring winners should have waited. We didn't even have the mats on us at the time of the tournament ending. I find it interesting that it wasn't a problem at the tournament, and now it is.

And as far as I know, Crypt doesn't care who gets the mat, so in all reality, Shaun did place second and the records are correct in that regard.

Zippy
09-30-2011, 01:41 PM
Taking away a prize is not an option, should not even be discussed imo. How about is there an alternate prize the legitimate but slighted winning player can receive? If that happened where I am, we'd chip in to buy the shorted person a brewfest mat off the 'bay or somesuch. Pass the hat. Sorry this happened - sounds like everyone tried to make it work out but an "honest mistake" was made.

daOrc
10-01-2011, 06:14 PM
Yar. But in regards to what Jon said in his other post in this thread, you can help prevent errors like this in the future by using match result slips, pairings lists, or if it's a small tournament, just jotting down on a piece of paper who beat who each round. Or you can charge the laptop battery before the tournament.

The laptop died in the middle of one of the rounds. We went back and wrote down the matches and results and continued on paper. So, it wasn't the pairings that was a problem. The error was at the end when trying to calculate the tiebreakers. I was the only person at the event that knew how to calculate the tiebreakers. We had 3 players at 4-1 and when I did the calculation, I picked the wrong Mike by accident which resulted in a tie, so instead of trying to calculate all of the 1st tie-breakers in order to calculate the 2nd tie-breakers, everybody agreed to have the 2 players play and the winner would be decided based on that.