I also approve of the word "tournament".
Tournament isn't bad, but I think it's a trifle inaccurate, since nearly all sporting tournaments (College World series and a few others being notable exceptions) are single elimination. While a single elimination matchup voting scheme would be Condorcet compliant, it's not what we're really advocating.
I prefer "round robin voting" or "matchup voting", but I think "tournament voting" is OK too,
In fact, here's a way I sometimes explain Condorcet vs. plurality:
Say you have a bunch of basketball teams, and you want to find out which one is the best. Do you have them all run onto a court at once and fight over the ball? No - you have them compete two at a time, and hold a tournament.
Current plurality voting is like all the teams running onto the court at once. Condorcet is like a round robin tournament.
It seems like boxing is an easier analogy. Say you have ten boxers and you want to know who is the best.
Plurality - throw them in the ring, the last one standing is the winner.
IRV - have a referee in the ring who pulls out anyone who's getting badly beaten. Last one in the ring is the winner.
Borda - the boxer with the most landed punches wins.
Condorcet - have them fight one-on-one in a round robin.
---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
