Alliance Selection New Rule Question Turning Point

If there is an odd number of teams going into elimination, is the last team eliminated or is there an alliance of 1?

i don’t know for sure, but i would guess that they get a by.

But would there be a one-team alliance or would they be eliminated???

There cannot be a one team alliance. The last unpicked team would not get to play.

Thank you, which rule governs that?

From the Tournament section of the manual:

(Emphasis mine)

(Emphasis Mine)

So, to verify, are you saying Alliances have to have two teams, always, no matter what, so the last team gets eliminated?

Not eliminated. They just don’t go to eliminations. It is very common at large events that not everyone gets to play in eliminations.

Yes, alliances are ALWAYS two teams. You adjust your number of elimination alliances to the number of teams in the event up to 16 2-team alliances.
16-23 Teams - typically 8 2-team alliances with no byes
24-31 Teams - typically 12 2-team alliances with the top 4 seeds getting byes into the quarterfinals.

32 Teams typically 16 2-team alliances with no byes
These are the recommended brackets by RECF. I guess one could also run other sizes, but some sizes don’t work well. 10 alliances does not work very well, but 14 alliances just means the top two seeds get byes into the quarterfinals. As John Tyler mentioned above, it is not unusual for some teams to not make it into the elimination rounds depending on the size of the event and the size of the elimination bracket. For example, if a 24 team event is set up for 12 alliances and a team drops out, the eliminations needs to be changed to 11 alliances and one team will not participate.

If every team declines to be selected by the first alliance then you will have eight alliances of one team.

So through declining, some weird things could happen.

But would that happen? Would the bottom seed really decline an invitation?

Then why does it give you the option to do unbalanced alliances still?

TM is designed to be generalized across a whole spectrum of game configurations.

RECF determines what is a qualified tournament result based on running the event according to the Game Manual and circumstances that are local to the event.

“Unbalanced” never gave the ability to create 1-team alliances. It allows 2-team alliances in an unbalanced tournament of 3-team elimination alliances, but since there are no 3-team alliances this season, the question is moot.

Also, no matter how many teams decline, there will NEVER be 1-team alliances. If all but 8 teams (for example) decline, Tournament Manager would be reconfigured (don’t ask) and the Eliminations would be played with 4 alliances.

I’ve been away from the RECF for a couple of years, but I’d bet a dollar this has not changed.

The GDC last year said that this was possible:

But of course this is a crazy situation that would never happen in real life.

correct - a lot of history in TM that many do not understand. Sorry to have been overly generic.

I stand corrected. That was after I left the RECF… If you have to play with 1-team alliances, I pity the inexperienced EP or scorekeeper who needs to get TM to accept it. Hint: use the setup option for “large event/expert” tournaments.

On the other hand, it’s a goofy question. Once the head ref carefully explains, “If you decline, you are done for the day,” declines to turn to acceptances really quickly.