Part of a post from January 6th in this board. It sure is hard to find posts even when you know the date. Would it be possible to number them along with the date? This would be great for when posts are deleted too, since there would be a break in the sequence like when a check is still out on your account. Anyways, the subject was starting the next tournament rounds before all games are played in the current round.

Then there's this case: 2004 Third Quarter Open Dark Chess=====
http://brainking.com/game/Tournaments?trg=4871&tri=14869
Section four has two players tied for the top spot. I've noticed that when two players have won every game against their common opponents and split their game or games between themselves they will finish with identical S-B scores regardless of what anyone else in the section does. Ol' scubabisto was the only one left with games to play four weeks ago. He's down to just two now, but it certainly would've been nice to conitinue the tournament while he's playing his games that won't change the outcome of the section at all. If I'm wrong about the S-B thingy with two players even like this and it is possible for one to outscore the other, may I ask your indulgence and say, "Nevermind" :)

After I posted this, grenv pointed out that a program could try every possible way the games remaining could be won or lost. In the case where the outcome is the same in all cases, he reasoned why not start the next round? I agree, and it seems like this brute force method would be easy to program and implement. You could have it start checking for different outcomes after about 3/4 of a section is finished. It should also be easy enough to put in certain special cases, like the one I site above, or when one player has finished all of his games and won them all.