On May 6, 3:14 pm, John Yeung <gallium.arsen...@gmail.com> wrote: > On May 6, 3:29 am, MRAB <goo...@mrabarnett.plus.com> wrote: > > > I have the feeling that if the number of rounds is restricted then the > > difference between the minimum and maximum number of byes could be 2 > > because of the requirement that players shouldn't play each other more > > than once, meaning that the players have to be shuffled around a bit, so > > a player might play a week earlier or later than would otherwise be the > > case. > > This is the feeling that I am getting also. All my efforts to keep > everything as balanced as possible at all times (to be ready for the > "season" to end suddenly at any time) result in messy jams that could > otherwise be alleviated if I allowed temporary imbalances, knowing > that there are more weeks later to make them up. > > John
If I were to set up a dictionary that counted players used in the bye list and only allowed players to be added to the bye list if they were within 2 of the least used player, would this be a good approach for managing bye selection or would using a dictionary in this manner be unnecessary/redundant? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list