Star Wars Scoring

I know the DCI reporting software fairly well and I cannot seem to fathom how that happened.  Unless it is using some other scoring system for SWMG but I highly doubt it.  If it was a DCI rated event, on wednesday check your match history and see if there are any discrepences.  

The log show's Zack (the SW playing version) as having a bye the first round and then winning his next two rounds. It looks like there might have been an error in reporting if he actually lost one. I'll ask him next time he's in to play.

well that was what cassidy said, maybe he was looking at the wrong line

I checked with Zack. He said he won his two matches after the first round bye. So I'm not sure what might have happened.

well then the paiting system is off because with 5 players there shouldn't be 2 undefeated.

Yeah, the DCI system doesn't recognize tournaments with less than eight people as sanctionable, I'm sure partially because of this sort of oddness. It does pop up a warning with that few people that after two rounds, pairing might become odd.

At the end of round 2, both you and Zack had 2/0 records, while two others had 1/1 records. The last player had a 0/2 record. Here comes the part that screws it up: (This won't happen every time, the random pairings in round one and two will sometimes solve it by random lucky pairing.)

In the third round...

If you had played Zack (creating a clear first place) and given the bye to the guy with the 0/2 record, then the two people with 1/1 records would have been forced to play eachother twice in the same tournament. Which screws things up in all new ways.

If you played Zack and the 0/2 player played one of the 1/1 players, then a 1/1 player would have gotten the bye, even though he does not have--nor is he tied for--the lowest rank.

The only way it mostly works, is not pairing the two 2/0 players against eachother, giving every player a new opponent each round, the worst player getting the bye, and possibly resulting in a points (DCI calculated or Game earned(as we traditionally use)) comparison, if both 2/0 players win again. Apparently they did and those points put Zack ahead last week.

oic... I suppose I just don't like being rated by how well or poorly the people I played did. It doesn't seem fair to me that just because the random pairing matched me with a player of a different caliber that I should be penalized. I suppose if it paired me with someone better than I, I probably wouldn't complain as hard. I just think that one should be judged by his own skill not by someone else's. Which is why I preferred the old scoring system... ranked by wins, then points