timoline wrote:is this also working with the bracket system?
Tournaments were poorly writen since the Stone Age.
Let's start from scratch.
For every tree-bracket could be created ranking.
For every round-robin could be created ranking.
Next important step:
For every round-robin could be created 2(TWO) table: ranking & standing.
Ranking is a "division view". (everybody use it)Standing is a ranking of all teams in one table. (nobody knows about it!!!).
These TWO tables are linked together very closely.
Let me say like "Romeo & Juliet", like "In & Jang", like "+ & -".
These TWO tables contains exactly the same data.(points, goals, matches, ...)
Ranking can be learned about HOW teams splited in divisions.
Standing can be learned about HOW teams ranked.
There is only one case where ranking & standing are exactly the same:
"round-robin no split" (in jl its called "simple league").
Repeat: ONLY ONE CASE.
In every other cases TWO (ranking & standing) are needed.
Back to timoline question:
For tree-bracket exists only ONE ranking.
Lets apply this knowleage to EURO2012:
Number of stages: 4(four)
1.Qualification (double round-robin nontuple split)
2.Play-offs (double round-robin quarduple split)
3.Group phase (single round-robin quarduple split)
4.Final bracket (8 teams tree bracket best-of 1)
1. ranking + standing
2. ranking + standing
3. ranking + standing
As a result: 7 'rankings'
AND THE MOST IMPORTANT: FINAL STANDING
SO 8 (eight) rankings are needed for Euro2012.
"ultimative equation of rankings"
number of needed rankings for tournaments:
2 * [stages] + 1 [final standing] - [stages as tree bracket or round-robin no split]
2 * 4 + 1 - 1 = 8
Is it understandable?