Graduated Progression Cut

[Jeremiah Snader]

What has been the impression or thoughts around a 'Graduated Progression Cut' (sample text provided from the document)? 

"For “Graduated 24 + 8,” at least 24 players remain, but no more than 32. Any player ranked 25th through 32nd with the same number of tournament points as the 24th-place player make the cut. The tournament then continues with the remaining players, usually with additional Swiss rounds"

I actually don't have much of an opinion on this, but am curious what people do think.  I know some people have had those borderline standings and not made the cut.  This sort of does relieve a bit of that, but perhaps makes the cut afterwards a bit awkward.  Although byes for the top after the cut did sound nice as a resolution.

[britt fitch]

Lauren has been talking about doing an “x1 cut” for some non official events. I think its the same idea where everyone with 1 loss makes it. if theres too many, they have 1 extra round to see who in the x1 bracket makes the cut. It really blows to have the same record and miss on random (an inconsistently applied) sos stuff. For example, Lauren had a cut-making record at worlds (again!) last year but missed it on sos…

I guess this kind of cut was pretty common in the L5R community from what I hear. I like it. It might make events 1 hour longer than they would otherwise be but no one goes home on a coin flip (as much).

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Boston_AGoT" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to boston_agot...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Jamie Perconti]

My first thought is: what's the practical difference between this and just doing one more Swiss round where everybody who wants to can keep playing?

[Jeremiah Snader]

I think the difference there would be just that you will have the same problem after that round.  You will have everyone fighting to get in with the same ranking again into the follow-up. It wouldn't change much.

[Britt Fitch]

You'd have to do it out on paper but I think you end up with the same situation as if you didn't. 

Picking a period where you have an (ideally) single undefeated as the cut timeframe. But you allow everyone within the cut window to contend. Seems to be generally satisfying to players and limits the feeling/effect of randomness in sos calculations. 

Sent from my iPhone