How I intended it be done was, excluding finals (as exceptions occur there), everyone must lose 3 matches to be eliminated. This continues until we have a final person from winner's bracket, a final person from loser's bracket 1, and a final person from loser's bracket 2. The person from each loser's bracket face each other, where the one from the higher bracket needs to win 1 set, while the one from the lower bracket needs to win 2. Whoever comes out on top faces the person from the winner's bracket, while the one who doesn't ends up in 3rd.
For the Grand Finals, regardless of the amount of loses the person coming from loser's may have acquired, the person from loser's needs to win 2 sets, while the person from winner's needs to only win 1.
Yes, the person from Winner's bracket only needs 2 losses to be eliminated unlike everyone else, and if the person from loser's bracket 1 wins Loser's Finals without losing a set, he only needs 2 losses as well to be eliminated. However, having a 3 sets to 1 Grand Finals or 3 sets to 2 Grand Finals is either completely one-sided, or would take forever. So, for simplicity's sake, making it a 2 sets to 1 grand finals makes everything easier.
3 sets to 1 is a 3:1 ratio, 75%
3 sets to 2 is a 3:2 ratio, 60%
2 sets to 1 is a 2:1 ratio, 66.6%, close enough to the middle.
Another thing I thought of earlier today (after making this post) play this out until we have a final 4, and then do a bracket from there. The top 2 people from Winner's bracket (who face each other in a best of 3 set beforehand for seeding), and the final person from each loser's bracket move on to a finals bracket.
The top seed from winner's faces the player from the second loser's bracket while the bottom seed from winner's faces the player from the first loser's bracket, and the rest plays out like a standard double elimination bracket.
The reason I am so much in support of a triple elimination bracket over a double elimination bracket is because it is a much better way of placing the lower ranked players. Double elimination, anything past 5th (and sometimes including 5th) can be considered somewhat inaccurate, and the farther you go, the less accurate it is. Triple Elimination, the third bracket removes most of those inaccuracies. Meaning someone who had an easy bracket and got higher than he should have will go down one more time in the third bracket, while someone who had a terrible bracket (like Brandon that one tournament who had to face Drake then me, and was eliminated), has the third bracket to climb back up to a position that is more accurate of what they should have placed.
Almost every tournament, we all know who the top 3/4 people will be (not necessarily the order). Whether we do a double or triple elimination won't affect these people at all, as by that point, if you would have lost, you're at the end of the triple elimination bracket as it is, and you would play the same people you just lost to, and will likely lose again. However, for everyone else, you have a full entire bracket to play through. Any inaccuracies that have been made after the first two brackets will mostly be fixed in the third bracket.
Also, for Kev's arguments, everyone who would have gotten eliminated early in a double elimination bracket still have a third bracket that they can play through to try to raise their position. If you get sent there right away, you will likely play people at your skill level to begin with, and slowly progress harder. So it gives extra games to our lower level players, and lets them play serious do-or-die games against people closer to their skill level.
Essentially, I would prefer this so that it better ranks the lower placing players. If this was a major tournament with out-of-province people showing up, all we care about is who places at the top, and the eliminated people don't matter, so obviously a double elimination tournament would be better there. However, in a small local friendly tournament like this, we care equally about our higher seeded players as we do our lower seeded players (at least we should), and having that third bracket gives lower seeded players more games, and a chance to play serious games that they have more of a chance (or maybe a good chance) to win. Makes it more fun for them, while nobody on top is affected.
Another side effect is that it makes power rankings that much easier to make...
Anyways, I've got stuff to do. I'll be back later.
