Awesome, please continue to shoot at the messenger.

The rules are WHAT THEY WERE with the EXCEPTIONS LISTED ABOVE. All I can do is try to give you guys right here the proper information. If you want to continue to argue, please feel free, but I am done explaining.


Didn’t people do a lot of assuming when they purchased tickets months ago while the rules are still being finalized today?

In a perfect world rules would be 100% accurate and posted on the site once and not need adjustment until the event is over. I think we’re all smart enough to understand that. Unfortunately there are some inaccuracies and @chesh is coming in here giving an FYI. We’re about two months out from the event, im sure as we get closer the rules will be finalized and posted. I wouldn’t lose any sleep over it. :wink:


I’m not sure why the fuss over the rules… all the major items seem to be finalized, we know there will be division resets… division restrictions… we know the pay system, etc. They’re just finalizing the numbers. I don’t think anyone’s Pinburgh experience will be impacted much by these last minute updates? I certainly haven’t been surprised or bothered by anything posted…

Now, the one thing I’d love to hear about would be pre-registration opportunities Wednesday evening. Pinburgh staff were excellent at chewing through the line Thurs AM, but 700 is a lot of peeps to process…


I’m not, but when someone starts getting short about why people might be bringing stuff up - there’s a simple reason. Poor labeling.

Well I remember a prior time when people were scolded for missing the fine print additions that were there. People felt they knew the gist, they didn’t focus on the minutia only to be barked at for not reading the rules when asking questions later.


I think all that’s being asked for is a short note marking the page as work-in-progress and/or not finalized. I don’t think that’s an egregious thing to ask.

Without this, I see the point others have raised about not having a way to know unless the reader belongs to this or other focused communities; e.g. a random passer-by to the site would have no way of knowing.

I also think any consternation over functional parts of the rules, in flux or not, is relatively pointless since it’s not like discussions here are going to change anything. They’ll be whatever they will be come tournament time.


I don’t usually ALL CAPS BARK at people who proofread my documents for free and calmly point out possible oversights, but hey, different strokes.


The finalized rules have been pushed out:


Direct link to PDF for easier reading:


Looks like they weren’t correct. Session 10:
1-32-33-64, 2-31-34-63, 3-30-35-62, …, 16-17-48-49


The death of finals warm-up practice.

Goodnight sweet prince.


No more qualifying tiebreakers

Ties for any seeded position, including the qualifying and bye cutoffs and the top qualifier, will be broken by the tied players’ cumulative win-loss records after Session 9, then cumulative win-loss records after Session 8, and previous sessions’ cumulative records as needed. In the unlikely event that players had the same win-loss record through all ten sessions, final position will be determined by the original seeding of the tournament. No tiebreaking games will be held at the end of Session 10.


The TDs get to go to bed earlier :smiley:


Also, no more “forced up to the next Division after Day 1 because we have lots of people with the same score”.

...Section 6 - In case of ties, players with the higher record after Session 4 will play in Division A. Further ties will be broken by higher record after Session 3, after Session 2, after Session 1, and by initial seeding...


so if you score a 12 in round 10, and it puts you in a tie for 40th (playoffs), you will not make playoffs because of round 9 standings.
Pros: prevents sandbagging, saves time.
Cons: wasted effort and excitement/pressure for round 10.


Is this a new addition? I don’t remember seeing it before. Also I was in a game last year where it probably would have been used if it existed, so I’m thinking it’s new.

Tournament officials may declare a player as a winner of a game in progress; that player will get a record of 3-0 for that game. This will generally occur only if the pace of the tournament is at risk due to exceptionally good play. The affected player must stop play immediately. Any other player reaching the same score in that game will also receive a 3-0 record.


The @dbs Runaway score rule! Definitely a good safety valve if a tournament absolutely cannot run behind / late.


The tie-break method puts all the weight on rounds 4 and 9 then, instead of 5 and 10. Sure, you still want to do well in the last 2, but you REALLY want to do well in 4 & 9 if you’re near the cut line so that you’ll do well in the tiebreak math.

I went back and looked at 2016 scores when I got into D finals on a tiebreaker, looks like I would have been in anyway based on how everyone scored in round 9 - but one of the eliminated players would have made it in.


Anyone know the rationale for this?


I would assume it’s just to save time – but you go into every other round in the competition cold, so it doesn’t seem that odd to have Finals be the same.


What if you’re one of the unlucky players who didn’t play one of the selected finals games during qualification rounds whereas your opponents did?