Round Robin Tournament Scheduling

Recent Posts

1
Requests / Re: A players and B players
« Last post by dwfortner on April 24, 2024, 03:19:01 PM »
Hey, I put together that schedule, I wanted to run it past my team to see if they liked the overall balance of it better (I do), and I did find one small error in that table showing the resolution for Example 2.11:
In the 6th row, columns 4 and 5, it works out if those are switched.
As in, for round 1, it should be M6F5 vs M2F3, not M6F4 vs M7F7 as both M7 and F7 are in the other 2 matches for round 1. Otherwise, the rest of the table works out for 10 2/3 rounds.
Here's what I mean:
2
Requests / Re: A players and B players
« Last post by dwfortner on April 24, 2024, 11:31:15 AM »
Thanks for the feed back. I figured there was no solution for the 8-round 4 court schedule. 
We've landed on a sort of hybrid schedule where there's a mix of multiple opponents. Similar to the Spouse avoidance with the additional round.
Thanks for the work you've done in the analysis and proof of all that. It's really hard to find stuff out there for these types of schedules.
To me that's surprising. I guess the way sports are going (pickleball, for example), it's more the case where you're either going to have a set partner or you're going to mix with everyone (so, like a 16-player whist) and most people don't care about actual mixed doubles.
Again, thanks for the work and feedback, and generally making yourself available. THis forum is really cool. Nice work :)
3
Requests / Re: A players and B players
« Last post by Ian Wakeling on April 23, 2024, 01:48:26 PM »
Hi, thanks for looking at the paper.  My best guess is that the schedule you want does not exist.  What I know is that the construction shown in the paper for larger schedules of 20, 24, 28,... players does not work for 16, and I have tried without any success to find a 16 player schedule by computer search. It is possible to have 16 players in 11 rounds on 3 courts (example 2.11), but of course there will be people with byes in every round.
4
Requests / Re: A players and B players
« Last post by dwfortner on April 22, 2024, 04:23:10 PM »
Hey, did you ever come up with an 8-week schedule for the mixed doubles that is not spouse avoiding?
I found a table for 16 players (8 women 8 men) in the paper Ian Co-wrote about generalizing the Spouse avoiding and strict mitchell mixed doubles round robin.
It shows a table for strict Mitchell Mixed Doubles Round Robin (strict MMDRR( 8 ) ), which has been really helpful, but I would love to know if someone worked through what an 8-round schedule of those matches would look like, with all players playing each round, if that's even possible.
5
Comments and Thanks / Help 6 teams and 7 teams beer Olympics schedule.
« Last post by CryptoCurrencymal on April 17, 2024, 01:01:56 PM »
Is it possible to create a fair and balanced schedule for a Beer Olympics event involving 6 teams and 7 teams, ensuring that each team has an equal number of games and breaks throughout the tournament?
6
Requests / Re: 36 Players in foursomes
« Last post by Sifo-Dyas on April 15, 2024, 08:05:49 AM »
Thank you very much
7
Requests / Maximum Play Determination
« Last post by bryanfaz on April 10, 2024, 01:46:17 PM »
I'm hosting a fundraising tournament and trying to figure out the maximum number of players I can accept into the tournament. Here are the conditions:

1.) 14 courts
2.) 1 day, 12-14 hours.
3.) Format - Doubles Mens and Womens (No mixed). Round robin, double elimination (back draw).
4.) Divisions - Two for men and two for women.
5.) Scoring - First to 11, by 2. 

I have total flexibility to adjust these parameters, except numbers 1 and 2. :)

We are naturally trying to maximize the number of participants for the charity. i've considered modifying the scoring by reducing the score to 9 or even 7, only winning by 1 to win game, etc. 

Your thoughts are greatly appreciated!!

Bryan  
8
That's brilliant Ian,

Thank you so much.

Adrian
9
Here is a solution that could work using the teams a01-a10 and b01-b10.  The partnerships should all be different, the byes are evenly distributed, and most pairs of players from different teams oppose once or twice.  I suspect that slightly better opposition balance may be possible.

(a01 a07 v b02 b04) (a05 a04 v b01 b06) (a02 a06 v b03 b07) (a03 a08 v b05 b08)
(a09 a02 v b02 b03) (a03 a01 v b06 b10) (a06 a04 v b04 b01) (a10 a05 v b05 b09)
(a02 a04 v b10 b08) (a03 a10 v b03 b04) (a01 a08 v b07 b02) (a09 a07 v b09 b01)
(a09 a06 v b08 b06) (a01 a02 v b09 b07) (a05 a08 v b01 b10) (a10 a07 v b05 b02)
(a10 a08 v b03 b06) (a04 a09 v b07 b05) (a05 a07 v b04 b08) (a06 a03 v b09 b10)
(a05 a02 v b03 b01) (a07 a08 v b06 b07) (a06 a01 v b05 b04) (a04 a03 v b02 b08)
(a10 a02 v b10 b04) (a09 a03 v b01 b02) (a06 a05 v b03 b05) (a04 a01 v b09 b06)
(a07 a03 v b07 b01) (a10 a04 v b02 b10) (a08 a02 v b04 b09) (a01 a09 v b08 b03)
(a09 a05 v b07 b10) (a08 a06 v b09 b02) (a02 a07 v b06 b05) (a01 a10 v b01 b08)
(a03 a05 v b04 b06) (a04 a07 v b03 b09) (a08 a09 v b05 b10) (a06 a10 v b08 b07)

(a09 a10 b09 b10) are the byes in round 1, (a07 a08 b07 b08) in round 2, etc..
10
Hi Ian,

Yes, exactly right, thank you.

Adrian