Editing Tournament (section)

==Group tournaments==<!-- This section is linked from [[Division (sport)]] -->
A group tournament, [[League system|league]], [[Division (sport)|division]] or [[conference (sports)|conference]] involves all competitors playing a number of ''fixtures'' (again, a fixture is one name for a tournament-match that determines who, out of two or three or more, will advance; a fixture may consist of one or more game-matches between competitors). Points are awarded for each fixture, with competitors ranked based either on total number of points or average points per fixture. Usually each competitor plays an equal number of fixtures, in which case rankings by total points and by average points are equivalent. The English [[County Championship]] in cricket did not require an equal number of matches prior to 1963.<ref>[http://static.cricinfo.com/db/NATIONAL/ENG/CHAMPIONSHIP/CC_HISTORY.html County Championship history] [[Cricinfo]]</ref>

[[File:Round-robin tournament_10teams_en.png|thumb|Example of a round-robin tournament with ten participating teams: each team plays each other team, over nine days]]

In a [[round-robin tournament]], each competitor plays all the others an equal number of times, once in a single round-robin tournament and twice in a double round-robin tournament. This is often seen as producing the most reliable rankings. However, for large numbers of competitors it may require an unfeasibly large number of rounds. A [[Swiss system tournament]] attempts to determine a winner reliably, based on a smaller number of fixtures. Unlike regular Groups format, fixtures are scheduled one round at a time and depending on the results of the previous one; a competitor will play another who has a similar record in previous rounds of the tournament. This allows the top (and bottom) competitors to be determined with fewer rounds than a round-robin, though the middle rankings are unreliable.

For clarification, this means in hypothesis [[UEFA]] adopts a Swiss System for [[UEFA Champions League]], the second matchday in the first stage (today's Groups Stage) would depend on the results of the first matchday of the same stage, the third matchday would depend on the results of both the first and the second matchday, and so on, in contrast to the predetermination of all Groups Stage fixtures upon the initial draw.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://keirradnedge.com/2021/02/07/swiss-or-pot-or-what/ |title=Gone to Pot? What works and what does not — by the man who tried to convince UEFA back in 2013 |website=keirradnedge.com |date=7 February 2021 |access-date=9 November 2021 }}{{reliable source|date=November 2021}}</ref>

Another tournament system that attempts to reduce the number of fixtures per competitor is the Pot System. Under that system, competitors are divided to different "pots" based on predetermined ranking and are drawn to play one rival from each pot, including their own pot. For example, in a 36-team World Cup, teams would be divided into 3 pots, with each team playing 3 matches - one against a Pot A team, one against Pot B team, and one against a team from Pot C. All teams are then placed in one general standing the defines qualification to the following stage.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://vimeo.com/168524603 |title=MatchVision POTs Format (c) |author=Matchvision |website=vimeo.com |access-date=9 November 2021 }}</ref>

There may be other considerations besides reliability of rankings. In some [[professional sport|professional]] team sports, weaker teams are given an easier slate of fixtures as a form of [[handicapping]]. Sometimes schedules are weighted in favour of [[local derby|local derbies]] or other [[sports rivalry|traditional rivalries]]. For example, NFL teams play two games against each of the other three teams in their division, one game against six of the other twelve teams in their conference, and one game against five of the sixteen teams in the other conference.

American sports are also unusual in providing fixtures between competitors who are, for ranking purposes, in different groups.  Another, systematic, example of this was the [[2006 Women's Rugby World Cup]]: each of the teams in Group A played each of the teams in Group B, with the groups ranked separately based on the results. (Groups C and D intertwined similarly.)  An elaboration of this system is the Mitchell movement in duplicate bridge, discussed [[#Bridge tournaments|below]], where north–south pairs play east–west pairs.

{{main|Group tournament ranking system}}
In 2-competitor games where [[tie (draw)|tie]]s are rare or impossible, competitors are typically ranked by number of wins, with ties counting half; each competitors' listings are usually ordered Wins–Losses(–Ties). Where ties are more common, this may be 2 points for a win and 1 for a tie, which is mathematically equivalent but avoids having too many half-points in the listings, or [[Three points for a win|3 points for a win and 1 for a tie]], which de-emphasizes ties in favor of playing to a decisive result. These are usually ordered Wins–Ties–Losses. If there are more than two competitors per fixture, points may be ordinal (for example, 3 for first, 2 for second, 1 for third).