After going right for the payoff in form of final results, let us backtrack and look at the competition in the chronological order.

Before the DE stages, all fencers fenced together in 5-point matches. Prior to the first matches, the fencers were ranked according to an educated guess by us in the competition leadership. That ranking was as follows:

Rangordning före QUICK Fäktare i startrankingsordning
1 Ulf WIKSTRÖM
2 Anders ZANDER
3 Lennart ÅSTRÖM
4  Henrik NORRMAN
5 Caroline PERSSON
6 Gabriel TÄCKENSTRÖM
7 Sara LÖFVENBERG
8 Engla SENNERLIN HOLM
9 Caspian PERSSON TÖRN
10 Erik SIMONSSON
11 Matthew BOYER
12 Emil FORSMAN
13 Leon HOFLING
14 Albin HOLMBERG
15 Albert BRÄNNBORN JINGFORS

Based on this initial ranking, a set of matches were generated. They were generated so as to fulfill the following criteria:

  1. almost all fencers should get 3 matches (that is not possible with an odd number, in those cases a few fencers will get 2 matches)
  2. All matches are fenced between fencers who are fairly closely ranked in the initial ranking
  3. It should be possible to reach from any fencer to each and every other fencer by a set of matches involving intermediate fencers.

Those matches are generated by the software in the computer, there is no human input once the starter list is entered into the computer. In this case, matches thus generated, and their results are as follows:

Fäktare i startrankingsordning UW AZ HN CP GT SL HS TP ES MB EF LH AH JB
WIKSTRÖM Ulf V 2 4
ZANDER Anders 2 V V
ÅSTRÖM Lennart V V 2
NORRMAN Henrik V 3 4
PERSSON Caroline 3 1 4
TÄCKENSTRÖM Gabriel V V 4
LÖFVENBERG Sara V V 3
SENNERLIN HOLM Engla V V 4
PERSSON TÖRN Caspian 2 0 3
SIMONSSON Erik V 3 V
BOYER Matthew V V V
FORSMAN Emil V 2 V
HOFLING Leon 4 V
HOLMBERG Albin 1 V
BRÄNNBORN JINGFORS Albert 1 2

Here, we see that 3 fencers went winless, and only one went undefeated. Of the 21 matches, only one ended with a 5-0 result, and 6 with 5-4. The average score of the losing fencer was 2.57.

All of this resulted in a ranking after the match results which looked like this:

Ranking after QUICK Fencer
1 Anders ZANDER
2  Henrik NORRMAN
3 Lennart ÅSTRÖM
4 Gabriel TÄCKENSTRÖM
5 Ulf WIKSTRÖM
6 Caroline PERSSON
7 Sara LÖFVENBERG
8 Matthew BOYER
9 Erik SIMONSSON
10 Engla SENNERLIN HOLM
11 Emil FORSMAN
12 Caspian PERSSON TÖRN
13 Leon HOFLING
14 Albin HOLMBERG
15 Albert BRÄNNBORN JINGFORS

One sees that despite the large number of upsets, the ranking before and after the QUICK stage were not too dissimilar. The system awards a 3-place jump in the rankings to the only (so far) undefeated fencer.

If one now uses this ranking, and re-sorts the match table according to it, one should get a table with fewer upsets. That is indeed the case, this re-sortment gives a table with 7 upsets. Those upsets are when there is a loss noted in the upper-left side of diagonal of the table. The re-sorted table is s shown below:

Beräknad ranking Fäktare i startrankingsordning AZ HN GT UW CP SL MB ES HS EF TP LH AH JB
1 ZANDER Anders V 2 V
2 NORRMAN Henrik 3 4 V
3 ÅSTRÖM Lennart 2 V V
4 TÄCKENSTRÖM Gabriel V V 4
5 WIKSTRÖM Ulf V 4 2
6 PERSSON Caroline 3 1 4
7 LÖFVENBERG Sara V 3 V
8 BOYER Matthew V V V
9 SIMONSSON Erik V 3 V
10 SENNERLIN HOLM Engla V 4 V
11 FORSMAN Emil 2 V V
12 PERSSON TÖRN Caspian 2 0 3
13 HOFLING Leon 4 V
14 HOLMBERG Albin 1 V
15 BRÄNNBORN JINGFORS Albert 1 2

In the next post on this competition, I will go over how the ranking from the QUICK stage feeds into the first poule round, and what happened before the second poule round.