what do you think of this structure?

[jstnrgrs]

I just thought of this, and I don't know if it is a terible idea, or a good idea.

Multi-table tourntment, with two players at each table (one table of three if need be). Whenever someone is knocked, out, a player would move, so this is not the same as a heads-up tournament in a single elimination format.

I may try this after work next week.

[TomHimself]

[ QUOTE ]
I just thought of this, and I don't know if it is a terible idea, or a good idea.

Multi-table tourntment, with two players at each table (one table of three if need be). Whenever someone is knocked, out, a player would move, so this is not the same as a heads-up tournament in a single elimination format.

I may try this after work next week.

[/ QUOTE ]i dont understand

[Sean D]

So basically like 6-max shorthanded tournaments except 3-max?

[Quicksilvre]

You mean like a single-elimination tournament? It can work. However, instead of having a three-handed table, I would just randomly assign a bye. Ideally, you'll have eight or sixteen players (or anything 2^n) so it works out evenly.

[jstnrgrs]

suppose there are 7 players to start. There would be 2 tables of 2 and one table of 3. supose that one of the players were eliminated from a 2 -table. Then one player would be moved from the three table to the empty seat, so now there are 3 tables of 2.

Now suppose that another player was eliminated. The player that is left without an opponent would be moved to another table so that there would now be 1 table of 2 and one table of 3.

This process would continue until only one player remains.

I think this format would be good because all players would be continuously playing (instead of having to wait for the round to be complete, or for a bye).

[flatline]

I don't see anything wrong with the idea; its unique if nothing else. I'd be interested to hear how it turns out.

[Lottery Larry]

It might be interesting to see how the blinds change when a 2-player game becomes 3 handed, but using a dead button you should be okay.

what do the knocked out players do, cheerlead?

Let us know what the players think of it. I can't decide what to think of it myself.

You could also do a series of heads-up matches and have the knockouts play each other. That way, only one person is "on the bench" at any time.

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]
I just thought of this, and I don't know if it is a terible idea, or a good idea.

Multi-table tourntment, with two players at each table (one table of three if need be). Whenever someone is knocked, out, a player would move, so this is not the same as a heads-up tournament in a single elimination format.

I may try this after work next week.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see any problem with it, but its not to my taste. With seven players I'd much rather play a single table freeze-out. Seven players is a really nice number for the single table freezeout format.

Obviously its great for players who like heads up and very shorthanded play.

Also, I think the players at the three player table would have an advantage, all other things being equal, although I could be wrong about that.

--Zetack

[jstnrgrs]

[ QUOTE ]
It might be interesting to see how the blinds change when a 2-player game becomes 3 handed, but using a dead button you should be okay.

what do the knocked out players do, cheerlead?

Let us know what the players think of it. I can't decide what to think of it myself.

You could also do a series of heads-up matches and have the knockouts play each other. That way, only one person is "on the bench" at any time.

[/ QUOTE ]

The players who are knocked out can go home, or watch, or whatever. Just like a normal game. The point is that I want to avoid having players have to wait around while they are still in.

[PumaFilaCook]

[ QUOTE ]

Also, I think the players at the three player table would have an advantage, all other things being equal, although I could be wrong about that.


[/ QUOTE ]

For the players at the 3 table the blinds wouldn't come around as fast so it would be a big advantage.