## [2010 Ideas] Number of people x number of rounds

Pedro_S (2010-01-05 20:24:32 +0000)
Another thing I was thinking the other day is about the # of people required to have an extra round. Why do we need 100 people to do 4 rounds? I mean, it goes like 8, 16...100 O_o Yes, of course having 4 rounds with 20 people is not good, but I think a lower number than 100 should be used. If organizers have time and are willing to do an extra round, and have like 70 competitors, why shouldn't it be allowed? Then comes the question of how much should it be. I'd say something like 50 would be fair(er). Or maybe 8, 16, 32, but 32 seems a little low.
TMOY (2010-01-05 21:55:25 +0000)
I thiink the idea of the possible fourth round was to allow to add a qualification round to the biggest competitions. Putting four rounds of an event in an average competition doesn't seem a good idea to me because it means less different events, and the 100 competitiors limit was set high enough to prevent this. Now that comps with 100+ competiors are not that uncommon, I think on the contrary that the limit should be raised.
BryanLogan (2010-01-06 01:07:38 +0000)
I would say the minimum number of competitors for rounds should be: 1-15 competitors=>1 round 16-30 competitors=>2 rounds 31-100 competitors=>3 rounds 100+ competitors=>4 rounds
Ron (2010-02-13 23:39:16 +0000)
[quote:2r843sm7]1-15 competitors=>1 round 16-30 competitors=>2 rounds 31-100 competitors=>3 rounds 100+ competitors=>4 rounds[/quote:2r843sm7] Do we really want to change the current numbers? 1-7: 1 round 8-15: 2 rounds 16-99: 3 rounds 100+: 4 rounds
Pedro_S (2010-02-13 23:53:28 +0000)
[quote="Ron":14eulznn][quote:14eulznn]1-15 competitors=>1 round 16-30 competitors=>2 rounds 31-100 competitors=>3 rounds 100+ competitors=>4 rounds[/quote:14eulznn] Do we really want to change the current numbers? 1-7: 1 round 8-15: 2 rounds 16-99: 3 rounds 100+: 4 rounds[/quote:14eulznn] I prefer the current numbers over what Bryan suggested...
Sebastien (2010-02-17 02:25:21 +0000)
[quote="Ron":k4qxswr1] Do we really want to change the current numbers?[/quote:k4qxswr1] no.