2013 - AAG 40 League

gamerman01

@seththenewb:

Is this playoff going to be 1 vs 8, 2 vs 7, etc? Same with the other playoffs?

Definitely. With 1’s and 2’s getting byes if there is a bracket with 6-7 players and not 8.
I’m glad you asked, others were probably wondering.

bmnielsen

@seththenewb:

I thought there was talk of making the minimum games higher? I don’t know whatever happened with that discussion, but it happened at one point. I would be in favor of making a higher min game to get in. Although it’s hard to change things in the final stretch like this as it wouldn’t exactly be fair to bmnielsen and toanca. Although it doesn’t seem to be fair to someone like Hank, Arathorn, etc to get bumped by someone who has a 1/3 of the games under their belt and those against weaker opponents.

It definitely would have been more unfair to the other guys, it would have felt really weird getting in three months after starting to play :) Looking forward to the extra playoff brackets though!

Well good luck to those that make it into the playoffs.

Jennifer

The way I was going to run the playoff bracket was the way I set up the brackets for tournaments.

Take half the players out and number the other half. Start with player A on one side and roll a die equal to the number of players on the other side (yes you can roll a 1d7 or 1d9 using virtual dice - it violates all the rules of dice to me, but hey, it is what it is) and whoever it landed on is who that player played.

So if we have:

Column A:
Player A
Player B
Player C
Player D

and

Column B:
Player 1
Player 2
Player 3
Player 4

I would take player A, roll a 1d4 and the result would be his opponent. Say I rolled a 3, then the bracket would be Player A vs Player 3.

As for minimum amount of games to qualify, I do not think I changed it ever from a minimum of four games. However, if Gamerman and I discuss it, we might kick someone out who only has 4 games, has not played in 7 months and we have someone who has 39 games but lost 1 and is super active in the league. (tried to pick ridiculous numbers - I am not using any specific individuals in this example.)

arathorn

@Cmdr:

The way I was going to run the playoff bracket was the way I set up the brackets for tournaments.

Take half the players out and number the other half. Start with player A on one side and roll a die equal to the number of players on the other side (yes you can roll a 1d7 or 1d9 using virtual dice - it violates all the rules of dice to me, but hey, it is what it is) and whoever it landed on is who that player played.

So if we have:

Column A:
Player A
Player B
Player C
Player D

and

Column B:
Player 1
Player 2
Player 3
Player 4

I would take player A, roll a 1d4 and the result would be his opponent. Say I rolled a 3, then the bracket would be Player A vs Player 3.

As for minimum amount of games to qualify, I do not think I changed it ever from a minimum of four games. However, if Gamerman and I discuss it, we might kick someone out who only has 4 games, has not played in 7 months and we have someone who has 39 games but lost 1 and is super active in the league. (tried to pick ridiculous numbers - I am not using any specific individuals in this example.)

But you wrote an amendment to your own rules. Seth provided the citation.

Jennifer

@allweneedislove:

@Cmdr:

There is still the four game minimum.ï¿½ We increased the number of games you can play against the same opponent, but I do not remember a discussion about increasing the minimum number of games to qualify for the playoffs.

is going back to four game minimum another change?

reply 336 on this thread says 8 games, and that is what i thought we were using.

i hope it is 8 or more. 4 just seems too small of a sample size.

8 games it is then.

arathorn

Awesome. Then we’re all on the same page.

@arathorn:

Awesome. Then we’re all on the same page.

Not really. The both of us are on page 54. :-D

gamerman01

I am not opposed to Jenn’s dice rolling system for playoff matchups, for the official league playoff for the top 8 win %. (As opposed to seeding 1v8, 2v7, 3v6, 4v5). Mainly because ordering us by win % when we played totally different combinations of opponents and played very different amounts of games, does not give us an accurate seeding anyway. I mean, Alexgreat is #1 by win% so far :wink:

However, since it was my idea to have the add’l non-official league playoff brackets and I am sponsoring them, and also because the seeding there will be by my rankings system and not by win %, they WILL be set up 1v8 2v7 etc. with 1’s and 2’s getting byes if there are not 8 players in the bracket.

MagicQ

@Gamerman01:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhOB4pSke42ydF93TUcwNFB2Y1JvYm9weThsdzV0cEE#gid=0

Sign up for the playoffs here, even if it currently looks like you will be in the top 8. In case you don’t end up in the top 8, you will be signed up then.

Only 1 requirement - 4 completed league games by 11/1/13.

We currently have enough for 2 additional playoffs, for a total of 3. If we have enough signups there will be a 4th bracket.

I don’t have a reason against playoff games also counting for 2014 league other than it feels weird because it is never done in any sport at any level that I am aware of. However, it does seem to make sense for our purposes. After all, the rankings take into account strength of schedule…. so as long as next year’s playoff qualification is not determined by win % but by PPG…

I thought 4 games are enough for playoff. Now 8?

arathorn

@MagicQ:

@Gamerman01:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhOB4pSke42ydF93TUcwNFB2Y1JvYm9weThsdzV0cEE#gid=0

Sign up for the playoffs here, even if it currently looks like you will be in the top 8. In case you don’t end up in the top 8, you will be signed up then.

Only 1 requirement - 4 completed league games by 11/1/13.

We currently have enough for 2 additional playoffs, for a total of 3. If we have enough signups there will be a 4th bracket.

I don’t have a reason against playoff games also counting for 2014 league other than it feels weird because it is never done in any sport at any level that I am aware of. However, it does seem to make sense for our purposes. After all, the rankings take into account strength of schedule…. so as long as next year’s playoff qualification is not determined by win % but by PPG…

I thought 4 games are enough for playoff. Now 8?

If you want to make it for the “Official Playoffs”, with the 8 players with highest Win%, it was changed a good while back to 8 games.

However, if you want to join Gamerman’s two playoffs, open to those that sign up, you only need 4 games. Gamerman requires 4 games to rank you, and the extra playoffs will be sorted by PPG according to his rankings.

So, yes, the number was changed, and no, it wasn’t for all playoffs.

gamerman01

Thanks arathorn. That’s all correct

arathorn

@Gamerman01:

Thanks arathorn. That’s all correct

You’re welcome! :)

gamerman01

Now that we’re within a month of the playoffs, I’m starting to think more about them…

Jennifer, when you say you take 4 players A,B,C,D, do you take those at random or are they the top 4? If A,B,C,D are the top 4, then the top 4 will not meet in round 1. Or is it going to be completely random?

lexgreat

I mean, Alexgreat is #1 by win% so far :wink:

Its an accident, a cruel joke of the system!!! For my part, I am relieved to have the correct place in your head’s ranking.

gamerman01

@Gamerman01:

Jennifer, when you say you take 4 players A,B,C,D, do you take those at random or are they the top 4? If A,B,C,D are the top 4, then the top 4 will not meet in round 1. Or is it going to be completely random?

Still waiting for answer - thanks

Jennifer

Player 1 vs Random of 1-7 (8 remove 1.)
Player 2 vs Random of 1-5 (8 remove 3.)
Player 3 vs Random of 1-3 (8 remove 5.)
Player 4 vs Last available player

So the top 4 could end up playing each other in round 1. But it’s not guaranteed. After the initial pairings, it’s just winner vs winner. Or so I have always done it in the past (by always I mean last year’s league and last year’s tournament…so I guess ALWAYS is a misleading term a bit…)

Best part of online diceys are that you can roll odd sided dice. 1d7 is possible! (I don’t think there exists a 1d7 physical die on the planet however!)

Degrasse

The joy of wikipedia! Yes, there are seven sided dice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dice

gamerman01

@Degrasse:

The joy of wikipedia! Yes, there are seven sided dice.

I love wikipedia!

gamerman01

@Cmdr:

Player 1 vs Random of 1-7 (8 remove 1.)
Player 2 vs Random of 1-5 (8 remove 3.)
Player 3 vs Random of 1-3 (8 remove 5.)
Player 4 vs Last available player

So the top 4 could end up playing each other in round 1. But it’s not guaranteed. After the initial pairings, it’s just winner vs winner. Or so I have always done it in the past (by always I mean last year’s league and last year’s tournament…so I guess ALWAYS is a misleading term a bit…)

Best part of online diceys are that you can roll odd sided dice. 1d7 is possible! (I don’t think there exists a 1d7 physical die on the planet however!)

OK - whatever - the top 8 have win% currently ranging from .923 to .786 so the seeding doesn’t really matter.

2013 - AAG 40 League

Featured Topics

T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

L26 PTV GeneralDisarray (Axis+10) vs AD Allies)

BM4 fasthard(X) vs Oskar2KX(L+25) - alternate bidding

cwglee axis vs dawggg allies +40 g40 oob

L26 1940 Global OOB Dawgoneit (X) vs. Martin (L+15)

PTV 25 playoff Ghostglider vs 666 (axis +14)

L25 BM4 fasthard(X) vs simon33(L+16)

L25 G40 OOB cwglee51 (L+55) v Jacob16 (X)

L24 OOB GeneralDisarray (X) vs AndrewAAGamer (L+60)

28

18.0k

40.8k

1.8m