Last night at our usual Wednesday Evening Club, we played a Double Round Robin with a total of 4 players. After completing it, we decided to play another Round Robin.
Can this be submitted all together since both tournaments were Quick Time Controls?
If that’s the case, I assume I would merge it together and pair it like a regular swiss, but manually add the 2nd tournament as the games were played in order?
Thanks
I think the existing (old) USCF software won’t even accept double round-robins, let alone triple. You should just submit it in Swiss (round-by-round) format.
As I recall, Mike Nolan says the new software will handle double round-robins, but I’m not so sure about triple. So you may still have to submit it in Swiss format, i.e. something like this:
Bill Smythe
I think that’s what I was going to do, here’s how it went
Player1 L-2 L-2 W-4 W-4 W-3 W-3
Player2 W-1 W-1 W-3 W-3 W-4 W-4
Player3 W-4 W-4 L-2 L-2 L-1 L-1
Player4 L-3 L-3 L-1 L-1 L-2 L-2
Then having the next one, I guess I append it?
Player1 L-2 L-2 W-4 W-4 W-3 W-3 W-3 W-2 W-4
Player2 W-1 W-1 W-3 W-3 W-4 W-4 W-4 L-1 W-3
Player3 W-4 W-4 L-2 L-2 L-1 L-1 L-1 W-4 L-2
Player4 L-3 L-3 L-1 L-1 L-2 L-2 L-2 L-3 L-1
I assume this will not effect any bonus, etc, since it was a quick event and so forth, that it’s okay to just submit it as one.
There’s such a thing? OK, let me get this straight:
In a RR, everyone plays one game against everyone else. So in a QUAD (ie: 3RR with 4 players) we have 3 games per player in 3 rounds.
In a DRR, everyone plays two games against everyone else. So in a QUAD (ie: 3DRR with 4 players) we have 6 games per player in 3 rounds.
So, in a TRR, everyone plays three games against everyone else. So in a QUAD (ie: 3TRR with 4 players) we have 9 games per player in 3 rounds.
Is that right?
TIA,
AJG
It wasn’t a planned triple round robin, we first played a regular double round robin, then decided to play another round robin after that, which I ran as a swiss.
I’d just like to submit it as one instead of two different ones, but don’t know if it makes a difference or not.
Bill’s right that this would be submitted as a swiss-type event in which players met each other more than once.
(It is unlikely that anything beyond a double round robin is common enough to include an input format for it, but this was a single ‘event’ as far as the players were concerned so it should be a single section for rating purposes.)
That will generate warning messages during the validation stage about players facing opponents more than once.
Also, there are some places in the ratings process where the formulas are affected by whether or not a player faced the same opponent more than once, though I don’t believe that has a significant impact on the post-event rating.
OK, I just wanted to make sure it was okay to do this.
The first tournament was G/10, while the second was G/5. I figure since they’re both Quick, it doesn’t matter.
Also that the games were played in order wont matter as well.
Just out of curiosity, how do you “run a round robin as a Swiss”?
It might affect the post-event ratings slightly, especially if bonus points are involved. But your players’ results were remarkably consistent, with player 2 always winning, player 1 always winning except against player 2, player 3 always losing except to player 4, and player 4 always losing – except for ONE game where 1 beat 2. So, if the players’ pre-tournament ratings were in the order 2-1-3-4, as I suspect they were, there will probably be no bonus points.
Bill Smythe
Yea, I wish I won that game 
Maybe there could be just a single input format for all N (as in N-tuple round robins) up to, say, N=4 or N=6 or N=8.
When round-robin format is selected, the first question presented by the software could be “How many players?” and the second could be “How many games per round?”. The second could even be phrased as multiple choice:
Single round-robin
Double round-robin
Triple round-robin
Quadruple round-robin
etc
Then, when the form appears to enter the results, enough space could be allowed to enter all the results.
Bill Smythe
There is in SwissSys with a $ for 2 wins, etc…
but I don’t think it submits to USCF that way.
The new ratings programming will accept a double round robin table. # is a win-and-draw, incidentally.
The problem with going beyond a double round robin is that you need even more tokens to represent the additional possible point scores. And to be honest, how often would a more-than-double round robin format be needed?
In Swiss-Sys, I know you can force it to run almost anything, including a double or triple round robin as if it was a Swiss by entering forced pairings from a Crenshaw table for each round. It’ll complain a bit about players facing each other more than once, but it will produce a proper set of files to upload.
When you try to generate a rating report from SwissSys for a double-RR, it tells you to convert it to a straight swiss first. So a 5-round double swiss ends up as a 10-round swiss with people playing twice. It is possible that this could run into the limit on the number of rounds, but I’ve never heard of it happening in practice.
Yes, and I’ve always hated those symbols ($ for 2-0, # for 1.5-0.5). For one thing, W now stands for 1-1, D for 0.5-1.5, and L for 0-2. For another thing, there is no way to deal with half a forfeit, such a player losing the first game and then refusing to play the second.
Better would be just to double up on the letters – for example, WW for double win, WD for win and draw, WL for split result, DD for two draws, etc. Forfeits could use the usual X and F symbols. For example, LF would mean a played loss and a forfeit loss.
A triple round-robin crosstable (in round-robin format) might look something like this:
That ought to simplify the programming (and the appearance of crosstables) considerably.
The same idea could be used for double-round Swisses, too:
Bill Smythe
I’m just going to submit it as a 9 round swiss, no big deal.
If you want, could have more then one section. Just have the players in section 1, section 2, section 3. When having a large number of games, say having 14 games with each and everyone, just have a number of sections with the same people in each section.
This would not rate all of the games for each player as a single block of games. Where possible, all of the games should be in a single section so that they are rated as a single block of games. Otherwise, the order in which they are rated may affect the post-event rating.
Swiss-Sys currently has a limit of 14 rounds, I don’t know what the round limit on WinTD is, but I assume it probably won’t work for more than 20 rounds since that’s the maximum that the current data format will support.
We do have events in our archives with 20 rounds in them, but I don’t know how they were entered into the system.