[monty42]

Good grief, this isn't that complicated.

The earned bye gets replaced by 1 VP. It's added at the beginning of the tournament. 1st round pairings are still random as usual. Now either you win and still get paired with the winners or you lose and, worst case, get paired with someone who had a TT which will most likely get paired with one of the losers anyway.
As far as the SoS goes, the player with the earned VP has won a tournament for that (get rid of those damn hand downs already) so if he's regarded higher ranked in the eyes of the SoS, that's fine with me.

[nobthehobbit]

Good grief, this isn't that complicated.

The earned bye gets replaced by 1 VP. It's added at the beginning of the tournament. 1st round pairings are still random as usual. Now either you win and still get paired with the winners or you lose and, worst case, get paired with someone who had a TT which will most likely get paired with one of the losers anyway.
As far as the SoS goes, the player with the earned VP has won a tournament for that (get rid of those damn hand downs already) so if he's regarded higher ranked in the eyes of the SoS, that's fine with me.

First-round pairings are fully random because everyone starts with 0 VP. If some players start with 1 VP they'd all be matched against each other.

Similarly, if you add that 1 VP before the second round, then anyone with a bonus VP who gets a Full Win in the first round would end up paired off. And so on. That effectively makes the bonus VP a penalty, whenever it's applied.

[monty42]

If some players start with 1 VP they'd all be matched against each other.

What makes you think that? You'd just do random round one pairings, regardless of who has an earned VP.
And then the rest of the tournament will take care of itself.

[JeBuS]

If some players start with 1 VP they'd all be matched against each other.

What makes you think that? You'd just do random pairings, regardless of who has an earned VP.

And if there's two people who have an EB, instead of facing off in a later round, one might end up essentially out of the tournament after the first round. To some, I guess that might be a feature, not a bug. But to others, it makes VP worse than EB.

[monty42]

Good grief, this isn't that complicated.

The earned bye gets replaced by 1 VP. It's added at the beginning of the tournament. 1st round pairings are still random as usual. Now either you win and still get paired with the winners or you lose and, worst case, get paired with someone who had a TT which will most likely get paired with one of the losers anyway.
As far as the SoS goes, the player with the earned VP has won a tournament for that (get rid of those damn hand downs already) so if he's regarded higher ranked in the eyes of the SoS, that's fine with me.

You'd just do random round one pairings, regardless of who has an earned VP.
And then the rest of the tournament will take care of itself.

[JeBuS]

So let's say 2 continental champs, instead of getting a Rd 1 bye, now are randomly assigned their first game against one another. Is the 1VP better for the loser than a Bye would have been?

[monty42]

So let's say 2 continental champs, instead of getting a Rd 1 bye, now are randomly assigned their first game against one another. Is the 1VP better for the loser than a Bye would have been?

No. But that's just the name of the game. He's still gonna be on 2 points rather than 1. And he didn't travel to god knows where to sit around for an hour.

[nobthehobbit]

So let's say 2 continental champs, instead of getting a Rd 1 bye, now are randomly assigned their first game against one another. Is the 1VP better for the loser than a Bye would have been?

No. But that's just the name of the game. He's still gonna be on 2 points rather than 1. And he didn't travel to god knows where to sit around for an hour.

But again, if you do fully random pairings for round 1 (thus ignoring the pairing algorithm, which mandates pairings by VPs), but then start pairing by VPs for round 2, then two people with a bonus VP who both get FWs in round 1 would end up matched in round 2. You're just pushing the problem back a round.

Just add the bonus VP at the end. Makes no difference to the final standings and keeps it from being potentially a penalty.

[monty42]

I give up.

I'd rather like to hear from some of the people who a rule change like this would actually affect.

[Mogh, Son Of Worf]

I value 1-2 additional hours of sleep over 1 VP. Nobody is forced to take their byes - if you want to play, you are allowed to. Everybody I talked to was very happy with their first and second round byes.

[monty42]

I value 1-2 additional hours of sleep over 1 VP...

Was hauptsächlich am saufi liegt, wie ich vermute...

[Marquetry]

I value 1-2 additional hours of sleep over 1 VP. Nobody is forced to take their byes - if you want to play, you are allowed to. Everybody I talked to was very happy with their first and second round byes.

This. If you want to play and give up the bye, you can! Or you can relax. I liked mine this year, although I don't normally get them. I think Michael likes them, as he can relax, get food, or... finish making another deck for the weekend...

Just my personal though

[Spectre9]

If I had byes I would be happy to take them.

Putting people that have earned byes by being stronger players into the early pairings just hurts the people that get paired against them.

If it's more about the time waste then play some casual warm up games or just sleep in and have a long breakfast. The mental fatigue at the end of the day for somebody that has played 2 more games is going to take a toll, that's part of the advantage of byes.

[jadziadax8]

I liked having mine this year.


Sent through Subspace from the Starship Enterprise

[bhosp]

I just think it’s a bad situation where the world champ played (I think) in less than half of Day 1 and still qualified, thanks to a process involving a bunch of drops from Day 2. The whole thing felt vaguely disrespectful to the field, in a way that I admittedly find myself unable to articulate clearly.