Among the ideas I've advanced to our ad hoc group of tournament organizers for our planned April undergrad tournaments is the following question: Assuming an untimed match of 20/20, as a player, how WOULD you want to break match ties? a) Sudden-death tossup(s) with interrupts scored b) Sudden-death tossup(s), but do not score interrupts (so that a positive answer always wins the match) c) Three tossups only, then sudden death tossups (score interrupts) d) An "overtime period" of three (five?) tossups with bonuses e) Do any of the above, but give some credit to the team that loses the overtime match in team placements [half-win]. f) Record the tie and move on to the next match. Break a tie with a separate game/subset of tossups if it makes an effect on the tournament. g) Record the tie and move on to the next match. Score the tie as a half-win (as sugggested in (e)). No "rematch". Right now, for our April undergraduate tournaments, I lean to (d) in the context of (e) as it is more reflective of the game (including "team play" on bonuses) rather than just making the game be decided by essentially "penalty kicks"/"shootouts". Not that there's anything wrong with it necessarily, but for the sake of competitive rigor, I have suggested doing (d) if time were not a major issue in the scheduling of the tournament. PS: Consequently, in timed matches, I prefer a 3-minute overtime period of tossups and bonuses. Repeat overtimes until someone wins. If times-out are part of the match format, each team gets one additional time-out for every TWO overtimes.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:43 AM EST EST