Example: junior tennis tournaments
Consider a junior tennis tournament of 32 participants. Typically the duration of such a tournament is between three days ( Friday, Saturday and Sunday) and one week. Most of these tournaments use an elimination system. They entail a draw whose purpose is to eliminate the possibility of the top players playing against each other in the initial rounds of the tournament. Consequently, the number-one and number-two players on the entry list can only play against each other in the final. In the initial round they will play against the players from the bottom half of the entry list.
For second-rate players it is a privilege to play against a top-player, but it is not easy to motivate either side to perform at the best of their ability. Why would a top-player put in an all-out effort if only using half of their abilities can easily win them the match? How do you convince a 12 year old that whether she is behind 1:6 0:5 or ahead 6:1 5:0 then it is still crucial to do her best to get another game and make it 1:6 1:5 or 6:1 6:0? In short, the traditional elimination system simply doesn't lend itself very well to assisting coaches, parents and clubs in helping their players develop the competitive spirit, the determination to fight for every point at any time during the match regardless of the score or the opponent.
Assume that the 22nd player on an entry list has been drawn to play against the top-player in the first round. Should she be happy with the draw? On one hand, if she is a junior and her major objective is to develop her skills, then it is great to play against a top-seeded opponent. On the other hand nobody likes to be eliminated in the first round which is why it is considered "bad luck" to be drawn in the first round against a top-seeded player. This contradiction is one of the major flaws of the elimination system.
Another major deficiency of the elimination system is that after the first round half of the participants are out of the competition. As a result the more-skilled players get to compete in more matches than the less-skilled ones. This neither fair nor good for developing new talent. It is particularly unfair and demotivating for kids and their parents and coaches who have been training hard to prepare for the tournament and to develop their playing skills. Ideally all players should be treated equally. Elimination is too heavy a punishment for just one defeat and it greatly reduces the extent to which players learn from their losses. After losing in their first match the most obvious and beneficial thing for the players to do is to analyze their loss and try to do better in the next match. To provide such an opportunity for a sake of the kids, parents, coaches and anyone concerned with developing a successful tennis program should be a top priority for all tournament organizers, clubs and associations.
equTournaments address all of the above flaws of the traditional tournament design and provide practical and easy-to-apply solutions. equTournaments does not discriminate against less-skilled players. All kids are entitled to play the same minimum number of matches. equTournament ensures that all juniors, their parents and coaches will feel that the effort made and expenses incurred to participate in a tournament is always well worth the cost.
In an equTournament there is no need to explain to juniors either how important it is to play for every point no matter who the opponent is because an equTournament's ranking takes into account not only who or lost but more importantly the actual score and the respective strengths of the opponents.
When the score is weighted heavily in how the ranking is calculated it sends a direct message to the players that it is crucial to fight for every game and every point. Every extra game won or even extra point won will push you up in the ranking. One can look at equTournaments as an implementation of the notion of "percentage tennis". It forces young players to think and play according to this notion.
When the strength of the opponent becomes another major component of the ranking we send another important message - it does not matter who you play against just go out there and do your best. In fact, in an equTournament it could be better to lose 3:6 3:6 to a top-seeded player than to win 6:4 6:4 against the 22nd player. In this way an equTournament solves another problem. A draw to play against the top-seeded player is regarded as it should be - as 'lucky' since you have an opportunity to get an idea of how to play against a top-player. At the same time, however, even if lose the match as expected, you still have the same chance to go up in the ranking as you would if you played against a second-rate player.
Below is a demonstration of how to use an equTournament in practice. We give two examples. The first one is a games-based match version and the second is a points-based match version.
Games-based match version
In professional tennis tournaments the competitors ordinarily play no more than one match per day, although sometimes bad weather forces them to play two. In junior tennis, especially in the 12 to 14 and under categories there is no need to stick with a professional tennis match format. In this example we use a different match format which is better suited for junior tennis tournaments.
The duration of a traditional tennis match is unpredictable. It can last anywhere from 40 minutes to 3+ hours. This can be a problem for two reasons. First, it creates scheduling problems when some matches sometimes get started 3 or 4 hours later than they were originally scheduled. Second, in junior tennis, it makes more sense to play against two opponents on the same day than against just one, especially if a tournament only lasts three days. So if it happens that the first match is more then 3 hours long the kids will require a reasonable amount of time to recover before their second match. In this case playing a second match in the same day might not be a good idea at all. To get around these kinds of problems in modern junior tennis certain tricks are applied to make the duration of a matches more predictable. These include, (1) the player who is the first to get four points in a game wins that game, (2) instead of playing a third set players finish with a tie-break and (3) rathen than playing a best-of-three sets match, matches consists of one long set only.
equTournament offers other ways to render the duration of tennis matches more predictable. You can limit the duration of the match to the total number of games played or the total number of points played. Based on the match statistics of the 2003 US Open the average number of games played in a set in all four categories - men, women, boys and girls - was between 9 and 10. The average number of points played in a set was also quite similar in all four categories, that is, between 59 and 62.
In an equTournament the first thing to be decided by the officials is the number of games required to complete a match. Depending on the age group, a match can last 14, 16, 18 or even 20 games. That would make the duration of a tennis match more predictable and the scheduling of matches more mangeable for any given day.
Assume that we have to manage a tournament for 32 girls who are 14 and under. We decide the duration of the matches to be 18 games. Every day each participant will play two matches of 18 games which is exactly 36 games per day. The time-interval between each of the matches should give the participants enough time to recover, analyze the previous match with their coaches and prepare for the next match. The objective of every match is to win as many games as possible. The more games a player wins the higher the ranking she will have. So even if a top-player competes against a second-rate player she must still win as many games as possible. A 17:1 victory is a much better outcome than a 10:8 victory. Actually a 10:8 victory might be a very bad outcome for a top-player as we will demonstrate below.
The results of all of the matches in this tournament will be produced by a tennis match simulator. The table below is an entry list of the names of all 32 participants and the numeric representations of their strength which will be used in the simulator.
| # | Name | Strength | # | Name | Strength | # | Name | Strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Aaliyah | 10,000 | 12. | Francesca | 7,250 | 23. | Qadira | 4,500 |
| 2. | Amber | 9,750 | 13. | Geneva | 7,000 | 24. | Reseda | 4,250 |
| 3. | Bianca | 9,500 | 14. | Hide | 6,750 | 25. | Savannah | 4,000 |
| 4. | Benetta | 9,250 | 15. | Inari | 6,500 | 26. | Thea | 3,750 |
| 5. | Chiara | 9,000 | 16. | Jett | 6,250 | 27. | Umeko | 3,500 |
| 6. | Cailin | 8,750 | 17. | Kelsey | 6,000 | 28. | Venita | 3,250 |
| 7. | Damita | 8,500 | 18. | Liesl | 5,750 | 29. | Wren | 3,000 |
| 8. | Dae | 8,250 | 19. | Madison | 5,500 | 30. | Xena | 2,750 |
| 9. | Electra | 8,000 | 20. | Nalani | 5,250 | 31. | Ynes | 2,500 |
| 10. | Elysia | 7,750 | 21. | Onida | 5,000 | 32. | Zara | 2,250 |
| 11. | Fabienne | 7,500 | 22. | Patience | 4,750 |
The next step is to decide who should play against whom in the initial two rounds. At the beginning of the tournament all of the participants should be treated equally. Therefore, the initial two rounds must be generated randomly. The purpose of the initial rounds is to obtain an initial ranking.
The manner in which the opponents are matched against one another is also important. To make the initial ranking as credible as possible we recommend the generation of a random "chain" of matches. A "chain" is an easy-to-understand visual concept. In the chain below, for example, players are represented by nodes and matches by arcs. Above each arc is a label which indicates the round to which the match is played.
In the screenshot below all the matches of the first two rounds are entered with simulated results.
The next thing is to decide the match-pairings for the 3rd round. Many strategies can be used. For example, the number-one player could play against the number-two, and the 3rd ranked player against the 4th, the 5th vs 6th, etc. Slight changes should be made however if the 5th ranked player has already played against the 6th ranked player in either of the previous two rounds. This strategy is called the 'play the closest competitor' rule. It match players of more or less of the same level and at the same time improves the credibility of the ranking.
Generally, equTournaments are so flexible that you can create your own scheduling rules that would best suit the needs of your tournament. For instance, some privileges might be given to the representatives of the host club. Assume that Francesca and Fabienne are from the host club. Each is given the right to pick one opponent for herself from the entire tournament entry list. It would make a lot of sense for them to pick top-players as opponents. This would be good for their personal game development as well as interesting for the rest of the club members who would have an opportunity to see how well their representatives compete against the top players.
Assume that in this particular tournament Francesca chooses Aaliyah as an opponent in the third round and Fabienne chooses Benetta. Everybody else will play against the closest to them participant in the ranking. The exceptions are Bianca and Electra. Since Bianca has already played against Elysia, Nalani becomes her next opponent. Similarly, Electra who has competed against Madison will need to play Inari in the next round.
After the third round, Chiara's 15:3 win over the 4th placed Jett puts her in first place. This is a good illustration of how important it is to get the best possible score. Note that Aaliyah's 12:6 win over 8th placed Francesca was not enough to keep her in first position.
The fourth round pairings can be decided soon after the third round matches are completed and the new ranking is computed. However, if the tournament lasts one week then the fourth round pairings can be decided at the same time as the third round pairings, i.e., after two rounds of tournament. In so doing, all of the participants have advance notice regarding the times of their matches for the second day of the tournament. In our tournament example we only have 3 days and therefore we would like to use the most recent ranking in order to create the schedule for the next round.
In the fourth round we match opponents who are close to each other in the ranking. As the number of matches grows we recommend using the information from the Main Menu > Tools > Suggest Singles dialog. As seen below, on the upper-right side of the dialog there are four spin-boxes. Three of them - vs, dR and dP - represent selectors which make the scheduling decisions easier and faster. Let's say we have to find an opponent for Chiara. Selecting Chiara's name in the list on the left-hand side creates a new list of opponents on the right-hand side of the dialog. The highlighted players of the new list - Bianca, Aaliyah, Amber, Electra and Elysia - are those who fulfill the requirements which are defined by the three spin-boxes. The first spin-box vs = 0 selects out those opponents who have played zero matches against Chiara. The second spin-box dR = 5 selects out those players who are no further than 5 positions from Chiara in the ranking. The third spin-box dP = 2000 selects out those players who are no further than 2000 points from Chiara.
The fourth spin-box demonstrates the minimum possible score required to raise a player's position in the ranking. For example, Chiara can move up in the ranking if she beats Bianca with a score no worse than 10:8.
Based on the information in the above dialog it makes sense for Chiara to play against Bianca in the fourth round. The same would be done for all of the other players, i.e., select the player's name from the list of the left-hand side of the dialog and choose the opponent from the list on the right-hand side. The following screenshot contains the matches of the fourth round including the new ranking.
The same procedure can be used to match opponents in the 5th and 6th rounds. If the tournament lasts one week then it is possible for every competitor to play up to 14 matches. Other matching strategies can be used as well, such as playing 12 rounds of matches in the first 6 days of a tournament culminating in a final between the top two players on the last day.
It is important to mention that managing an equTournament on a round-by-round basis is not the only option. Feel free to invent your own schemes which best suit your particular needs. One of the main characteristics of an equTournament is that it can accommodate countless numbers of scheduling schemes.
Points-based match version
The duration of a tennis match can be limited by the total number of points played. As we have mentioned before the average number of points played in a set is approximately 60 and the average number of games in a set is between 9 and 10. Therefore, the average number of points in one game is about 6. The shortest reasonable duration of a points-based match is probably 24 points. Both players would have an opportunity to serve six points from each side of the tennis court. But in general you can set the duration of a tennis match to whatever suits your needs the best. Actually, not all matches have to have the same total number of points played. If it suits your tournament better to limit the duration of a match to 20 minutes for example, you can allow the total number of points played to vary between matches instead.
Points-based tennis matches are very well suited to one- and two-day tournaments. We use point-based matches in our Thursday night tournaments. In such tournaments we don't rely on a round-by-round schedule because players should be able to show when it is most convenient for them and play against whomever they want. So, whenever two players are available to play a match they can do so assuming that a tennis court is available. After installing Equtar you can find examples of such tournaments in the file Examples.gm. In these tournaments most of the matches were initiated by the players themselves while a supervisor was in charge of entering the results and updating the ranking.
In points-based tournaments every match is interesting because both opponents are playing for every point whatever their relative strengths. Consequently, you will see top players 'chocking' while playing against a much weaker opponents, something that you will not often see in traditional tournaments. However, over time 'chocking' may completely disappear, as the players learn to adopt a very constructive thinking process - whatever happens, whether you end up winning or losing, all what you can really do is do your best to increase your chances of winning the point.
To develop a practical understanding of how a points-based equTournament ranks the players involved, you can use an example of the Thursday Night 2 tournament from the file Examples.gm. If you decide to open this tournament, then before going any further please switch to "Singles only" mode in the Ranking Category box.
In the screenshot below we have unchecked all matches from the 25th on and then we updated the ranking.
In a traditional tournament the next match between Nicolas and Evi would not be considered a particularly interesting one because Evi has almost no chance of winning. But in an equTournament it did turn out to be a very interesting and close match. To see why, please open Main Menu > Tools > Suggest Singles dialog and set the value in the equWin spinbox to 40. Please select Nicolas from the left-hand side list of players. Now from the right-hand side list of opponents you can see that Nicolas will rise in the ranking only if he beats Evi with a score of 35:5 or better.
The match between Nicolas and Evi was a spectacular one and both players were competing under a lot of pressure. Nicolas was not able to win 35+ points. He won the match with a 33:7 score. As a result, it was Evi who scored the equwin, i.e., an achievement, while it was an equloss, i.e., underachievement for Nicolas. As you see, Evi accumulated some points whereas Nicolas lost some points and fell to second place in the ranking.
Once again, this example clearly shows why equTournament is superior to the traditional way of organizing competition. Both Evi and Nicolas were under far more pressure to fight as hard as they could for every point that they would have been in a traditional match. This made the match far more exciting for them to play as well as for the spectators, parents and coaches to watch. But may be most important of all, from this match Evi and Nicolas learned far more than they would learnt if they had played a match in a traditional elimination tournament. In fact, in a traditional elimination tournament Evi would never even have had a chance to find out what it's like to play against a much stronger player like Nicolas playing at the top of his game.
In short, equTournaments has many advantages over traditional ways of organizing tournaments. It allows all players, no matter how good they are, to play a number of matches without being eliminated at a single loss. It ensures that every match and even every point counts equally. As a result, it encourages players to play as well as they can possibly be. Finally, and most importantly, it is a fantastic learning tool. In equTournaments all participants learn far more from their playing experience that they possibly can in any other existing tournament system. The sooner you switch to equTournaments the sooner and faster will the junior players of your association or club develop their talents and competitive edge to become the real winners they aspire to be.
