AWC 2018 Options • page 1/2 • Atomic WC • lichess.org

I'm considering changing the structure of the AWC for the next 2018 tournament and would be interested in any thoughts/feedback. I've put a few options below - please let me know if you have a preference (or have alternative suggestions):

A single elim KO the same as in 2016 and 2017.
A double elim KO - i.e. players have to lose two 10 game matches to be eliminated.
A single or double elim KO (like 1 or 2 above) but instead of a qualification round there's an arena tournament to bring the number of players down to 16, 32 or 64.
An 8 player single or double elim KO. The players are determined by a set criteria i.e. 2 from last year's tournament, 2 players with consistently high ratings, 2 players from special arena events, 1 via a community vote and 1 wildcard.

I'm considering changing the structure of the AWC for the next 2018 tournament and would be interested in any thoughts/feedback. I've put a few options below - please let me know if you have a preference (or have alternative suggestions): 1) A single elim KO the same as in 2016 and 2017. 2) A double elim KO - i.e. players have to lose two 10 game matches to be eliminated. 3) A single or double elim KO (like 1 or 2 above) but instead of a qualification round there's an arena tournament to bring the number of players down to 16, 32 or 64. 4) An 8 player single or double elim KO. The players are determined by a set criteria i.e. 2 from last year's tournament, 2 players with consistently high ratings, 2 players from special arena events, 1 via a community vote and 1 wildcard.

Iubar

#2

I would be fine with 1. and 2. but i dislike 3., because the tournament depens a lot of if a player has time or not. The other two options are more friendly to ppl, who are busy a lot with other stuff than Atomic. Even when there are more than one tournament, there some players may just have no time to play at those. 4. I dont like too much, cause a lot of ppl would not get to play. I like Number 2 the most, since one bad day doesnt get you out instantly.

contagio

#3

the first 16 of the ranking in lichess must have a place insured the other 16 should leave the elimination among the other participants match to 10 games, so would enter 32.

savagechess2k edited

#4

1 is good. That would create opportunities for 2000 to 2200 semi-strong players.

I have an(other) idea: Atomic Grand Prix:
Another event immediately starts after the previous event. In all of those events, top 3 get points, like 1. 40 2. 20 3. 10 4. 5 . Then after some events , the player with most points wins the GP.

@contagio what if players in top 16 don't want to play ?

1 is good. That would create opportunities for 2000 to 2200 semi-strong players. I have an(other) idea: Atomic Grand Prix: Another event immediately starts after the previous event. In all of those events, top 3 get points, like 1. 40 2. 20 3. 10 4. 5 . Then after some events , the player with most points wins the GP. @contagio what if players in top 16 don't want to play ?

contagio

#5

the following take place for exemple numbrer 8 no wanna play, number 17 take place an like that

contagio

#6

i think at least the top tem must be secure the place

kclee2172

#7

Maybe we can have (4) with 4 challengers decided by last tournament, rating or something like that and 4 challengers decided by preliminaries double elimination tournament.

12 player finals (top 4 from last year, top 4 from preliminaries, 2 rating spots, 1 wildcard, 1 community vote) with two finalists from last year, top rating, and winner of preliminaries getting higher seed. This way, people won't slack off in final rounds of preliminaries because 1st place get higher seed (not playing round 1 of finals).

Maybe we can have (4) with 4 challengers decided by last tournament, rating or something like that and 4 challengers decided by preliminaries double elimination tournament. 12 player finals (top 4 from last year, top 4 from preliminaries, 2 rating spots, 1 wildcard, 1 community vote) with two finalists from last year, top rating, and winner of preliminaries getting higher seed. This way, people won't slack off in final rounds of preliminaries because 1st place get higher seed (not playing round 1 of finals).

TheFinnisher

#8

A single elim KO the same as in 2016 and 2017.

Simple.
Everyone gets to play.
Shorter than double elim KO.
+/- Sudden death > upsets happen more likely.

Less games than in double elim KO.

A double elim KO - i.e. players have to lose two 10 game matches to be eliminated.

Relatively simple
More games than in single elim KO.
No sudden death > the weight of one match is less valuable. This increases the probability that the best players play in the finals.
Everyone gets to play.

Long tournament, 1) a lot to organize, 2) players might drop interest during the tournament.

A single or double elim KO (like 1 or 2 above) but instead of a qualification round there's an arena tournament to bring the number of players down to 16, 32 or 64.

● See 1) and 2).

About arena qualification:

Easier and quicker to organize compared to qualification round.

Arena format favours quick wins.

An 8 player single or double elim KO. The players are determined by set criteria i.e. 2 from last year's tournament, 2 players with consistently high ratings, 2 players from special arena events, 1 via a community vote and 1 wildcard.

Very competitive from the start, no lopsided matches.
+/- Much shorter than “open to all”-format.

Only the best players are allowed to play.

Similar discussion took place in CWC thread here: https://lichess.org/forum/team-crazyhouse-world-championship/cwc-suggestions. Few ideas from there:

Post #12: 5.1) Have 4-8 groups of 4-8 players each. Have everybody play everybody inside of a group, and have only a certain number from each group advance, and at that point either have some sort of seeding process or re-group the players.

Post #17: 5.2) Instead of having each seed determined by the current method, we can have the seeds determined by this x-player group method. Then, we will proceed with a knockout.

Everyone gets to play.
Lots of games.

Long tournament.

I know this is not topical yet, but when the sign-up opens, let me know if you need help in advertising it.

1) A single elim KO the same as in 2016 and 2017. + Simple. + Everyone gets to play. + Shorter than double elim KO. +/- Sudden death > upsets happen more likely. - Less games than in double elim KO. 2) A double elim KO - i.e. players have to lose two 10 game matches to be eliminated. + Relatively simple + More games than in single elim KO. + No sudden death > the weight of one match is less valuable. This increases the probability that the best players play in the finals. + Everyone gets to play. - Long tournament, 1) a lot to organize, 2) players might drop interest during the tournament. 3) A single or double elim KO (like 1 or 2 above) but instead of a qualification round there's an arena tournament to bring the number of players down to 16, 32 or 64. ● See 1) and 2). About arena qualification: + Easier and quicker to organize compared to qualification round. - Arena format favours quick wins. 4) An 8 player single or double elim KO. The players are determined by set criteria i.e. 2 from last year's tournament, 2 players with consistently high ratings, 2 players from special arena events, 1 via a community vote and 1 wildcard. + Very competitive from the start, no lopsided matches. +/- Much shorter than “open to all”-format. - Only the best players are allowed to play. Similar discussion took place in CWC thread here: https://lichess.org/forum/team-crazyhouse-world-championship/cwc-suggestions. Few ideas from there: Post #12: 5.1) Have 4-8 groups of 4-8 players each. Have everybody play everybody inside of a group, and have only a certain number from each group advance, and at that point either have some sort of seeding process or re-group the players. Post #17: 5.2) Instead of having each seed determined by the current method, we can have the seeds determined by this x-player group method. Then, we will proceed with a knockout. + Everyone gets to play. + Lots of games. - Long tournament. - - - - - - - - - - I know this is not topical yet, but when the sign-up opens, let me know if you need help in advertising it.

savagechess2k

#9

How about Grand Prix ? As I said in #4.

Samurai_Sri_Lanka

#10

What about A double elimination, with 32 players.

4 from last year tournament,
8 from best rating or last year rating average,
2 via a community vote,
2 wild cards,
16 from Arena tournaments. (4 tournaments and 4 from each or better 8 tournaments and 2 from each).

My idea is very similar to @tipau 's 4th idea. but I think its good to select 32 Or 64 for the final Knockout stage. (32 will be better).

in this way, all the best players are safe in their finals and all other players can compete for their place, via arena tournaments.

What about A double elimination, with 32 players. 4 from last year tournament, 8 from best rating or last year rating average, 2 via a community vote, 2 wild cards, 16 from Arena tournaments. (4 tournaments and 4 from each or better 8 tournaments and 2 from each). My idea is very similar to @tipau 's 4th idea. but I think its good to select 32 Or 64 for the final Knockout stage. (32 will be better). in this way, all the best players are safe in their finals and all other players can compete for their place, via arena tournaments.