Match Play Events Open Thread


I made a tournament series in Match Play, and I want to provide a link to these results. Ideally, this link should work even for people without a Match Play account.

This doesn’t appear to be a thing. Am I missing something?


The matchplay live link right above your buttons to edit the tournament, close it, etc? That didn’t work?

Also make sure it’s not checked as a test tournament.


You need to change “app” to live" in the link and it is now view able by everyone.


Are you sure we’re both talking about a series? There’s no editing function that I can see.

Same question.



Great, so it can definitely be done. I just have no idea how to do it.

Update: I get it now. Thanks, guys. Wouldn’t be terrible for the software to provide this link somewhere.


Any tournament in a series will link back to the series:


Possible bug.
Progressive strikes format. 3 players (Dave, Aaron, Josh) missed the first round and were added in round two. Strikes were assigned for round one but I don’t know how many.

Those three players were matched in the same group and appeared at the bottom of the standings page the rest of the night, despite having fewer strikes than some of the players ‘above’ them.

I suspect it has something to do with playing fewer games. Is there a workaround or did we maybe misconfigure the event?


Was just about to post the same thing - this was a major problem throughout the tournament.

Three players missed round 1, all were added to the player list prior to round 2 and had 2 strikes added manually. Swiss pairing.

My impression is that this is an issue with using Swiss matches in a strikes tournament. My expectation is that it would group players with similar numbers of strikes. It doesn’t look like the system was keying off of either strikes or wins for these players, it just left them at the bottom of the order throughout the tournament.

Issues seen:

  1. These three players remained at the bottom of the matchmaking bracket throughout the tournament, even through the last few rounds when they had drastically different strikes (3, 5, 8). All three were always paired together regardless of strikes earned. Since we had 25 players the bottom group was always 3 people until players left or were elminated, but even with 4 player groups these players were placed in the bottom group with one other player. After realizing this I started manually moving them into other groups based on their strikes at the start of a round.
  2. For the majority of the tournament these players were reported as last in the overall standings even though they had fewer strikes than other players.

Ancillary issues:

  1. Strikes are not always reported correctly in the TD rounds view. It looked like it was starting rounds with the number of matchplay based strikes visible without using the strikes adjustment. Refreshing after a while swapped in the adjusted strike total but this caused additional confusion for a round or two.
  2. I wasn’t able to reassign groups prior to publishing matches. This is probably to prevent cheating by TDs but resulted in a lot of headaches when people tried to coin up and start games they weren’t going to be assigned to because I had to publish the games and then move these players into appropriate groups.


G_Money asked about the same thing around post 828, and it was addressed. Somehow the system doesn’t know how many rounds those added players played, so it doesn’t place the players correctly. Although the system displays the correct number of rounds played on each player’s result page, so it certainly seems like the system should be able to sort this all out.


Ah- found it now: Match Play Events Open Thread

For us at least both the pairings and the standings were incorrect. If word gets around that all you have to do to get a big advantage in a matchplay strikes tournament is show up late… Ugh. We won’t be using matchplay for this format until this gets sorted out.


An actual suggestion on fixing it:

Number of strikes should be used for all matchmaking and standings for players that are not yet knocked out.

Final standings should be based on last round played, not total rounds played. Within a group of players knocked out or disabled in a certain round (if they leave early), ordering players by total strikes would make sense.


I don’t think this issue occurs if you do balanced instead of Swiss pairings. At least I’ve never seen it in my events and we allow late entries from time to time.


Just ran a blanced 4 strikes last sunday and had this exact issue.


Weird. Okay I guess I won’t allow late entries for strikes until this is sorted out.


There are two separate things at play here:

  1. Late-arriving players are shown lower in the standings than they strictly should be in knockout tournaments. This is because regular knockout tournament bases the standings on number of wins rather than number of strikes (has been the case since MP launched) and progressive & fair strikes uses number of games played first, then number of strikes

  2. In swiss pairing tournaments only, the tournament standings are used to create player pairings. As a result late-arriving players are also placed lower. For regular knockout tournaments the effect is not so great since number of wins is used to build standings so it’s usually just an off-by-one situation. For progressive & fair strikes, late arriving players are always put in the last group because number of games played is used to build standings.

I have pushed a fix for the second issue. In swiss pairing knockout tournaments late-arriving players will now be placed accurately in the groups you’d expect them to end up in.

A fix for the first issue is significantly more involved and has performance implications. It’s also less important since it doesn’t affect how to tournament unfolds, only how the standings are presented. I’ll get there eventually, but I have City Champ 7 to help out with this weekend. :slight_smile:


There’s now a link to PinTips on every game so you can easily find playing tips.

If you don’t see a PinTips link it’s because your arena doesn’t have an OPDB entry linked. The easiest way to fix that is to retire your current arena and add a new one – all new arenas you add automatically have OPDB IDs attached.


That is awesome! Thank you, clever Idea :slight_smile:


This is the experience in Adelaide, too. They love playing more arenas.


To lengthen the queue: immediately after entering a result I select “arena malfunction” for that arena. The two players that were just allocated to that machine go back to the front of the queue, where they were a few seconds earlier, so nobody is inconvenienced.