World Beyblade Organization

Just wanted to say how much fun I had over the whole weekend, and Friday night specifically. Kei is totally right in that the concentration of high level bladers in absolutely insane on Friday night, even more so than HMS on Sunday, imo. Super glad that I got to play (and beat ) all of you over the course of the weekend! It was super cool meeting all of you, and I can't wait to come back.

BEYBLADE NORTH 2016 (HMS) Results Spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1...sp=sharing

If you spot any mistakes, please let us know!

The Limited format tournament that happened on Friday May 27th has now been fully processed. Contact me if you find any mistakes.

Just to note though, these are the new Bladers' usernames (@[Kei]):
RonanTO
CalebTO
Ramudu
ZacharyTO

Dominic already had an account and it was renamed, to the mother's request, to DXC-Warrior.

BEYBLADE NORTH 2016 (BST) Results Spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1...sp=sharing

(Jun. 26, 2016  11:43 PM)Mitsu Wrote: [ -> ]BEYBLADE NORTH 2016 (BST) Results Spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1...sp=sharing

Just wanted to clarify something since some people will notice missing matches and participants. Due to the nature of being in the main convention center, we had a lot of people who dropped into the tournament, played a few matches, and left the tournament long before it ended.

We made the decision as a committee to not process any matches played by unregistered players who quit before the finals. (Most dropouts left much earlier than that.) This keeps the rankings way more legitimate and doesn't give a points advantage to players who had the opportunity to play against inexperienced players versus those who did not.

(Jun. 26, 2016  11:43 PM)Mitsu Wrote: [ -> ]BEYBLADE NORTH 2016 (BST) Results Spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1...sp=sharing

Just one small mistake I noticed: my record is listed as 5-2 when it was actually 5-3 (well, 6-3 if you count one of my battles that was dropped haha).

Also @[Bey Brad], would it be possible for you to share a link to the original Challonge results as well? Would like to take a look at those so I can get a better understanding of the path some players took throughout the Swiss Rounds. Even with this current spreadsheet, it's interesting comparing the path Mitsu, Wombat, Valentin, and I took to get to the finals.

(Jun. 27, 2016  12:25 AM)Kei Wrote: [ -> ]Also @[Bey Brad], would it be possible for you to share a link to the original Challonge results as well? Would like to take a look at those so I can get a better understanding of the path some players took throughout the Swiss Rounds. Even with this current spreadsheet, it's interesting comparing the path Mitsu, Wombat, Valentin, and I took to get to the finals.

http://challonge.com/BN2016Burst

Ah I was meaning to post about those tie breakers. We could've done a 3 block 3 person tie breaker to add 3 more players in the finals.

(Jun. 27, 2016  1:27 AM)Yami Wrote: [ -> ]Ah I was meaning to post about those tie breakers. We could've done a 3 block 3 person tie breaker to add 3 more players in the finals.

But at that point you're just making up rules to extend the tournament; nowhere do we permit separate blocks of three from one group of players to be created for that type of purpose. If anything, we could have probably played one more round of Swiss to lower the number of finalists to eight (two 6-1 players, six 5-2 players), but hindsight is 20/20 and even eight finalists is pushing it a little into the territory of an entirely new tournament. And in large events, it isn't supposed to be easy to make the finals; we're all used to small Round Robin or Block Round Robin events where you can possibly get away with having two or three losses and make the finals (depending on the situation), but the reality of most large competitive events is that more than one loss will put you in jeopardy of not advancing.

(Jun. 27, 2016  12:03 AM)Bey Brad Wrote: [ -> ]We made the decision as a committee to not process any matches played by unregistered players who quit before the finals. (Most dropouts left much earlier than that.) This keeps the rankings way more legitimate and doesn't give a points advantage to players who had the opportunity to play against inexperienced players versus those who did not.

While I agree with the reasoning behind this, I do have to question why Tim was excluded from the results. Although the crossed out name indicates that he dropped out of the tournament before the finals, from looking at the bracket it seems that he played all six of his preliminary matches and then dropped out because he didn't qualify for the finals. At least from other events I have attended in the past, it is not at all uncommon for players to leave if their preliminary matches have been concluded and they know they will not make the finals.

It is totally possible, however, that he dropped out after Round 4 (his last recorded win) and his last two losses against @[Cronus] and @[ICEICE] were by default but still recorded in the bracket unlike those of other dropped players. @[Bey Brad] you were the one that had to manage everyone so you would know better than I would, was this actually what happened?

(Jun. 27, 2016  12:25 AM)Kei Wrote: [ -> ]Also Bey Brad, would it be possible for you to share a link to the original Challonge results as well? Would like to take a look at those so I can get a better understanding of the path some players took throughout the Swiss Rounds. Even with this current spreadsheet, it's interesting comparing the path Mitsu, Wombat, Valentin, and I took to get to the finals.

Mitsu probably had the toughest path to the finals: Minion, Kei, 1234beyblade, U wot m8, Asterisk, and Valentin.

Mine was probably the easiest: U wot m8, JR, Tim, LMAO, Edwin, and Asterisk.

Three of my opponents (four if you count Asterisk, but I don't) were new or inexperienced players, and two of them ended up dropping out of the tournament. It does seem like that "tactical" loss against U wot m8 in the first round worked to my advantage, since win/loss matchmaking can be basically a coin toss between relatively easy or brutally hard.

Speaking of brutally hard, U wot m8 wins the award for most difficult schedule: Myself, Yami, *Ginga*, Mitsu, Valentin, and Dark_Mousy.

Does anyone know if it is possible to apply seeding to players in events run through Challonge? I feel like in the past we applied seeding based on users BeyRanks at AN events, which I thought was a great way to make use of that data and award the top players slightly based on their position in the rankings. It completely slipped my mind this time, but looking back, I find it weird for example that in Round 6 I was paired with 1234beyblade since we would have been the two highest seeded players left at 4-1.

(Jun. 27, 2016  1:58 AM)Wombat Wrote: [ -> ]Mine was probably the easiest: U wot m8, JR, Tim, LMAO, Edwin, and Asterisk.

Three of my opponents (four if you count Asterisk, but I don't) were new or inexperienced players, and two of them ended up dropping out of the tournament. It does seem like that "tactical" loss against U wot m8 in the first round worked to my advantage, since win/loss matchmaking can be basically a coin toss between relatively easy or brutally hard.

Speaking of brutally hard, U wot m8 wins the award for most difficult schedule: Myself, Yami, *Ginga*, Mitsu, Valentin, and Dark_Mousy.

Well, it was Asterisk's first time playing with Burst. I literally just handed him DHC before the event.

Wow, that's rough. I feel sorry for you @[U wot m8] haha.

(Jun. 27, 2016  1:58 AM)Wombat Wrote: [ -> ]Three of my opponents (four if you count Asterisk, but I don't) were new or inexperienced players

(Jun. 27, 2016  2:14 AM)Kei Wrote: [ -> ]Well, it was Asterisk's first time playing with Burst. I literally just handed him DHC before the event.

D'aw, you're a sweetheart, @[Wombat], thanks. I had managed to build up a bit of a streak, but I attribute all success to the fact that I was lucky that Scott handed me a good combo, and maybe in some small part to some residual muscle memory from MFB that lets me rip a BeyLauncher hard.

(Jun. 27, 2016  2:14 AM)Kei Wrote: [ -> ]Does anyone know if it is possible to apply seeding to players in events run through Challonge? I feel like in the past we applied seeding based on users BeyRanks at AN events, which I thought was a great way to make use of that data and award the top players slightly based on their position in the rankings. It completely slipped my mind this time, but looking back, I find it weird for example that in Round 6 I was paired with 1234beyblade since we would have been the two highest seeded players left at 4-1.

No, it's not possible. However, it lists the most points in order. So technically I would complain about that. It like if it was a 5 person final and I beat this person that got 3-1 and I got 3-1 we would still have to play again for finals. Although it points/seeding standing I would've placed the tournament.

There's something I would like to point out for future tournament if using swiss on challonge. Since this tournament was a disaster based on the people that left early or midway messed up the entire bracket by participate numbers. We originally started the tournament with 36 people and about midway we had 6 people leaving early which lead to a 30 people (Yes you did left out Jin that completed the tournament entirely). So what we should've done is end the tournament at round 5 rather 6. So by removing round 6 the top 4 plus 1234beyblade, Asterisk, Dark_Mousy, and Cronus would've competed in the finals.

Therefore, in swiss in the future. if there's an even amount of participants, should be playing 5 rounds. If there's odds play 6 rounds so other people plays at least 5 rounds so we can have a better score standing.

Big props to @[Asterisk] for trying to get to the finals. If it wasn't for mistakes he would have played in the finals.

(Jun. 27, 2016  1:58 AM)Wombat Wrote: [ -> ]

(Jun. 27, 2016  12:03 AM)Bey Brad Wrote: [ -> ]We made the decision as a committee to not process any matches played by unregistered players who quit before the finals. (Most dropouts left much earlier than that.) This keeps the rankings way more legitimate and doesn't give a points advantage to players who had the opportunity to play against inexperienced players versus those who did not.

While I agree with the reasoning behind this, I do have to question why Tim was excluded from the results. Although the crossed out name indicates that he dropped out of the tournament before the finals, from looking at the bracket it seems that he played all six of his preliminary matches and then dropped out because he didn't qualify for the finals. At least from other events I have attended in the past, it is not at all uncommon for players to leave if their preliminary matches have been concluded and they know they will not make the finals.

It is totally possible, however, that he dropped out after Round 4 (his last recorded win) and his last two losses against @[Cronus] and @[ICEICE] were by default but still recorded in the bracket unlike those of other dropped players. @[Bey Brad] you were the one that had to manage everyone so you would know better than I would, was this actually what happened?

Great eye, Wombat. You're right; I removed him from the tournament and therefore we didn't include his battles here, but it was my oversight because my notes show he did depart after round 6. I'll update the spreadsheet shortly. Thank you so much!

(Jun. 27, 2016  4:31 AM)Yami Wrote: [ -> ]There's something I would like to point out for future tournament if using swiss on challonge. Since this tournament was a disaster based on the people that left early or midway messed up the entire bracket by participate numbers. We originally started the tournament with 36 people and about midway we had 6 people leaving early which lead to a 30 people (Yes you did left out Jin that completed the tournament entirely). So what we should've done is end the tournament at round 5 rather 6. So by removing round 6 the top 4 plus 1234beyblade, Asterisk, Dark_Mousy, and Cronus would've competed in the finals.

Therefore, in swiss in the future. if there's an even amount of participants, should be playing 5 rounds. If there's odds play 6 rounds so other people plays at least 5 rounds so we can have a better score standing.

Big props to @[Asterisk] for trying to get to the finals. If it wasn't for mistakes he would have played in the finals.

Thanks for the advice. We're definitely looking for ways we can run large swiss tournaments better in the future. For larger events we've typically used double elimination, but wanted to give everyone more chances to compete.

(Jun. 27, 2016  2:42 PM)Bey Brad Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks for the advice. We're definitely looking for ways we can run large swiss tournaments better in the future. For larger events we've typically used double elimination, but wanted to give everyone more chances to compete.

Yeah, thanks Yami! Those dropped players did probably mess up the pairings somehow, but I'm not sure how to solve that problem when we're playing Swiss at a large convention.

That said, I do think an eight player final still would have been too big. It's an entirely new tournament. Six would have been nice, but four was fair enough in my opinion. Everyone who had two losses would have been eliminated already had it been double elimination, but because it was Swiss they probably got to play more meaningful ranked matches in the end, which is a positive in my eyes. Given that so many people travel so far for this event, it's better in my opinion to offer them a set of guaranteed six battles than possibly losing twice and then being eliminated.

Ideally we simply would've had a few more rounds of Swiss to make the finalists clearer, but the tournament was already very long. Hopefully we can run more stadiums concurrently next year.

Also when you complain about having only a difference of one loss with the players who advanced to the finals, you have to realise that people with one less loss than you can also, in turn, complain, and so forth. At some point we have to trace the line of elimination.

Quote:Mitsu probably had the toughest path to the finals: Minion, Kei, 1234beyblade, U wot m8, Asterisk, and Valentin.

Not super tough. I had played everyone but Asterisk (who I knew had been using Deathscyther Heavy Claw at the time) and Valentin in the past at Burst, so I kind of had an idea as to what they'd pull out. It would have been a lot worse had of I played in the matches U wot m8 had.

@[Kei] @[Yami] That's not correct, you can apply seedings on Challonge. However, what Yami said about points is correct.
@[Yami] The thing about 5 v. 6 rounds for even v. odd numbers of participants isn't necessarily correct. (In all reality you usually want to force swiss to have an even number of participants because having one person with a bye each round is a huge pain in swiss).
@[Kei] About dropped players, you just want to go back into the settings section and delete them from the participants list. This keeps their existing matches in play, but removes them as a pairing option from all further rounds.
@[everyone] Would it be worth writing up a Guide to Using Challonge thread?

P.S. There will be an edit to this coming later because there's something else that I wanted to add that I'm totally forgetting.

(Jun. 27, 2016  10:15 PM)Time Wrote: [ -> ]@[everyone] Would it be worth writing up a Guide to Using Challonge thread?

YES

Beyblade North 2016 (Burst) from Saturday May 28th is officially processed.

I got the right number of matches so I think I used everything from the spreadsheet right. Let me know if you find any errors though.

Woo! Thank you Kai-V!

And here goes the HMS tournament too. This is officially over and out, thank you to everyone who came, played and helped!