![[Welcome to Sensei's Library!]](images/stone-hello.png "Sensei's Library")
We need to decide how to tiebreak players who are drawn at points where they crossover division splits (like 6th + 7th), as wins followed by losses is obviously insufficient.
My personal feelings is that "vs" has some widely accepted fairness value (i.e. whoever won their versus match), and with a single round robin will always successfully tiebreak the two players... are there any objections to this?
Head-to-head for two people in never a problem and is usually best. This fails if there are three people in the tie break and they are 1-1 against one another. Is there potential for this to happen? If so, then I recommend that the lower ranked player takes precedence because he has done better relative to rank.
A very good option, generally, is to have a play-off, but that will probably take too long unless it's done live, rather than turn based.
Another option is SODOS, which is used regularly in Round Robin, though it's a bit dubious IMO.
I agree, and I would be happy with LovroF choosing live tiebreaks if the players agree, but I could see it being logistically difficult - especially with timezone issues.
SODOS (or S/B for chess enthusiasts) I am equally happy with, but there is stronger discontent with this system in my experience than head to head.
Ihave always been dissatisfied with SODOS. If your defeated opponent's did better so what? Why not use SOLOS - sum of opponent's you lost to (to lower the better)?
I think head-to-head is the only satisfactory option with two players. The three-player situation is also impractical for a live playoff because it requires each player to schedule and complete two games.