Originally Posted by legionmx
Ahm... I have few time so I will keep this simple.
When the Cibulkova situation happened, I was glad I had a back up. But something set me off. delicate said that the Cibulkova Bartoli picks wouldn't be counted. And that was parcially correct. The correct statemente should have been: "Main picks involving the match won't be counted, but back up picks will be, not regarding which match was it". So if someone had picked Cibulkova/Bartoli, the Bartoli pick should have counted. I checked Day 6 picks, and no one picked that combination, so there was no problem and I didn't mentioned it.
My point is, the rulebook lacks clarification in some points. I won't oppose this tournament results as I think it is correct according to the current rules, but a revision of those rules is definitely needed. The BYE is intended to give some advantage to the seeded, in the means that they have less picks in the final rounds, resulting in more possibilities for a valid pick in the finals. But I think in tie breakers, an average should be made. Number of sets lost, divided by number of picks. That should normalize the tie breaker criteria in the BYE scenario.
Thank you delicatecutter for an excellent tournament.
I have absolutely no idea what you're trying to say in the bolded paragraph. The rules are pretty clear to me
As for the rest of it, it has been debated and settled dozens of times in the past. There is really no point in arguing byes, especially not in a tournament thread. Take it somewhere else, but I suggest you actually get support if you're going to attempt to argue it. At this point, it's just incredibly annoying to have this same debate come up everytime there is a tiebreaker on the final day