Tournament Permutation Problem

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter DaveC426913
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Permutation
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around organizing a tournament for ten teams over three nights, focusing on how to fairly determine the best team given constraints on match scheduling and formats. Participants explore various tournament structures, including single elimination and Swiss pairing, while considering the implications of each format on fairness and scoring.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions what constitutes a "fair score" and notes that any chosen method will favor some teams over others.
  • Another suggests a Swiss pairing system as a non-elimination option that allows all teams to play multiple matches, though it may be impractical for travel.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the number of rounds required for a connected set of teams, with differing interpretations of match sequences.
  • There is a humorous suggestion of using darts as a method to determine the winner, highlighting the informal nature of the discussion.
  • Concerns are raised about the feasibility of single elimination formats within the three-night constraint, with one participant noting that it would require more rounds than available.
  • Participants discuss the implications of having ties and the conditions under which a unique winner can be determined.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the best tournament format, with multiple competing views on the effectiveness and fairness of different approaches, particularly regarding Swiss pairing versus single elimination.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions about the definitions of fairness and the specific requirements for determining a winner, as well as limitations related to the scheduling of matches and the implications of ties.

DaveC426913
Gold Member
2025 Award
Messages
24,286
Reaction score
8,434
TL;DR
Looking for a solution to play off ten darts teams on five boards in only 3 sessions.
I've got ten teams, five boards, and only three nights to figure out who's the best team.

We've had our regular season, so we have the teams ranked. (i.e. 1st place in regular season gets to play against last place, etc.)

Can we get a fair score out of 10 teams in three nights?

(Is that enough information? It's been so long. Curse you, Covid!)
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
What do you call a "fair score"?

Assuming each session only allows one competition per board: The largest possible connected set of teams (A played B, B played C, ...) is 23=8. Your 10 teams will be split into at least two groups who had no games against any team of the other group.
You can use the existing ranking as assistance, but then you'll have to figure out how much you want to rely on that and how much impact these three sessions should have. Any choice will favor some teams and disfavor others. "We use the existing ranking" is the least ambiguous option, but obviously that's not what you want.
 
You could have the teams shoot darts at each other and the last one standing wins. :-)
 
Single elimination appears to require 4 rounds, so unless someone plays twice in one night that won't fit.

You could use a Swiss pairing, which has the advantage of being non-elimination so everyone gets 3 matches.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: pbuk
mfb said:
Assuming each session only allows one competition per board: The largest possible connected set of teams (A played B, B played C, ...) is 23=8. Your 10 teams will be split into at least two groups who had no games against any team of the other group.

This doesn't sound right to me. If the first round is 1 plays 2, 3 plays 4 etc, then the next round is 2 plays 3, 3 plays 4,.., 10 plays 1, then 1 played against 2 played against 3 played against 4 played against 5 etc. You only need two rounds to get a connected set.
 
pasmith said:
You could use a Swiss pairing, which has the advantage of being non-elimination so everyone gets 3 matches.
Yes a Swiss pairing system is designed for exactly this situation. The only disadvantage is that pairings cannot be decided in advance which can make it impractical where teams have to travel to each other.
 
DaveC426913 said:
Can we get a fair score out of 10 teams in three nights?
Yes, but you might have a tie (## \lceil \log_2 n \rceil ## rounds are required to avoid this).
 
Last edited:
pbuk said:
Yes a Swiss pairing system is designed for exactly this situation. The only disadvantage is that pairings cannot be decided in advance which can make it impractical where teams have to travel to each other.
That should be all right. Most of us can climb the flight of stairs (to the lounge, with the fifth dart board) without too much forewarning. (We're all in the same club.) :wink:
 
  • #10
Office_Shredder said:
This doesn't sound right to me. If the first round is 1 plays 2, 3 plays 4 etc, then the next round is 2 plays 3, 3 plays 4,.., 10 plays 1, then 1 played against 2 played against 3 played against 4 played against 5 etc. You only need two rounds to get a connected set.
Oh right, I forgot the "with a unique winner" condition. In your example two teams winning both matches don't have a comparison. It's impossible to beat single-elimination or equivalent systems there.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
4K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K