Single Elimination: Two-Player Game Finished in a Tie and Newer Account Advanced

[Meeplelowda]

This tournament result was reported in the Castle Combo forum: https://boardgamearena.com/table?table=718967428

Here the newer account advanced to the next round. This is the first counterexample I'm aware of that a newer account advanced in a tied game, but I also don't recall any other examples where the tie wasn't based on a player being expelled.

So now the question is: has there always been a different rule if the game tied based on the rules (i.e., not someone being expelled), or is this a recent change?

And what rule is being applied in this circumstance?

[FSKFSK]

I thought account age was the tiebreaker, but that's usually in multiplayer elimination when someone is kicked.

Maybe it used the other tiebreaker, thinking time, which is used when a game ends due to time for the round expired? The "winner" used less thinking time.

I.e., player is kicked, account age is tiebreaker.

Game ends due to time expiring with nobody being kicked, thinking time is the tiebreaker.

[Meeplelowda]

I thought account age was the tiebreaker, but that's usually in multiplayer elimination when someone is kicked.

Maybe it used the other tiebreaker, thinking time, which is used when a game ends due to time for the round expired? The "winner" used less thinking time.

I.e., player is kicked, account age is tiebreaker.

Game ends due to time expiring with nobody being kicked, thinking time is the tiebreaker.

This was specifically a case where the game ended normally. No one was expelled and the round time didn't expire.

[FSKFSK]

It might be programmed to use the "thinking time" tiebreaker instead of "account age" tiebreaker when a game ends normally and is an exact tie.

[Mathew5000]

This tournament result was reported in the Castle Combo forum: https://boardgamearena.com/table?table=718967428

Here the newer account advanced to the next round.

This isn't new. It's consistent with my posts in this thread: https://boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=36559

[Meeplelowda]

This tournament result was reported in the Castle Combo forum: https://boardgamearena.com/table?table=718967428

Here the newer account advanced to the next round.

This isn't new. It's consistent with my posts in this thread: https://boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=36559

Looks like I missed this thread. Or at least I didn't participate in it.

[Mathew5000]

I thought account age was the tiebreaker, but that's usually in multiplayer elimination when someone is kicked.

Maybe it used the other tiebreaker, thinking time, which is used when a game ends due to time for the round expired? The "winner" used less thinking time.

I.e., player is kicked, account age is tiebreaker.

Game ends due to time expiring with nobody being kicked, thinking time is the tiebreaker.

This was specifically a case where the game ended normally. No one was expelled and the round time didn't expire.

In a single-elimination tournament, when someone is expelled the other player is the winner. There are only two players for each match in this type of tournament so expulsion does not result in a tie and there is no "tiebreaker". If the max duration is reached, then similarly there is no "tiebreaker" because it isn't a tie.

Is it possible for the players to "abandon game" by mutual consent in a single-elimination tournament? I can't remember whether that's possible, and then if so what happens; does one of those players advance to the next round, or are they both ruled to have lost so that their would-be opponent in the next round gets a bye? Anyway, even if it is possible to use the abandon-game-by-mutual-consent function in a tournament, it probably doesn't happen often.

[Mathew5000]

Is it possible for the players to "abandon game" by mutual consent in a single-elimination tournament? I can't remember whether that's possible, and then if so what happens; does one of those players advance to the next round, or are they both ruled to have lost so that their would-be opponent in the next round gets a bye?

Okay I created a tournament to test this out: https://boardgamearena.com/tournament?id=434629 In my first match I'm going to propose to collectively abandon game, and I'm hoping that whoever I'm against, will agree to that. Anybody interested please sign up; I can invite you to the tournament if you don't have sufficient Elo in Reversi.

[Meeplelowda]

Is it possible for the players to "abandon game" by mutual consent in a single-elimination tournament? I can't remember whether that's possible, and then if so what happens; does one of those players advance to the next round, or are they both ruled to have lost so that their would-be opponent in the next round gets a bye? Anyway, even if it is possible to use the abandon-game-by-mutual-consent function in a tournament, it probably doesn't happen often.

I'm not sure about single-elimination, but I think you can collectively abandon in a round robin and the way things go at BGA I think there's a good chance they wouldn't go through the trouble of coding a different way to handle it for single-elimination. What happens if you do is the big question of course.

[Meeplelowda]

Is it possible for the players to "abandon game" by mutual consent in a single-elimination tournament? I can't remember whether that's possible, and then if so what happens; does one of those players advance to the next round, or are they both ruled to have lost so that their would-be opponent in the next round gets a bye?

Okay I created a tournament to test this out: https://boardgamearena.com/tournament?id=434629 In my first match I'm going to propose to collectively abandon game, and I'm hoping that whoever I'm against, will agree to that. Anybody interested please sign up; I can invite you to the tournament if you don't have sufficient Elo in Reversi.

I need an invite. Hopefully people actually pay attention to the name of the tournament.