Top 7.2: Why It’s Better than Top 8

This system was created by me with the help of a very close friend, César Garrido, who recently passed away. Supporting its use is also a small tribute to him. César was passionate about fair tournament structures that avoided distortions like intentional draws. He always said that drawing was unsportsmanlike: if you enter a tournament, you should play to compete in every round.

🔴 The Problem with Top 8

The traditional Swiss + Top 8 system seems solid, but it has serious flaws:

  • It incentivises intentional draws at table 1 in the last two Swiss rounds. Just when the most interesting matches between the leaders should be played, they often aren’t, because it’s optimal for both players to draw. This is a failure, especially nowadays, when many tournaments are streamed live, and these key matches don’t even happen.
  • It doesn’t reward the top Swiss performer sufficiently. The top Swiss player might go 5-0 (though it’s rare because players often draw) and then be eliminated in the quarterfinals by someone who went 3-2. Final result: the 5-0 player finishes 5-1 and is out, while the 3-2 player continues with 4-2.

✅ What Is Top 7.2 and What Does It Fix?

  • If the top Swiss player wins both of the last two rounds, they receive a bye in the quarterfinals, meaning they advance directly to the semifinals.
  • The other 6 players must play in the quarterfinals first, as usual.
  • If the top Swiss player drew or lost either of the last two rounds, then there is no bye and a regular Top 8 is played.

This small change improves the system in several ways:

  1. It motivates players at table 1 to keep playing until the end, since the bye depends on winning both final rounds.
  2. It reduces some draws at nearby top tables, because if only 7 players make the elimination rounds, a draw at table 3 or 4 might no longer be safe. In some cases where a draw would have been correct under a Top 8, now it may not be.
  3. It fairly rewards the top Swiss performer, by giving them a real structural advantage in the elimination phase.

All of this is achieved without extending the tournament: it uses the same number of rounds and overall duration as the traditional Swiss + Top 8 system.

🧪 Has It Been Used Successfully?

Yes. The system has already been used successfully in multiple events:

🧾 How Many Rounds to Use Based on Player Count?

The following table shows the recommended number of Swiss and elimination rounds based on how many players enter the event.
In the highlighted orange cases, the organiser can choose between:

  • Top 8 (3 elimination rounds), as in the standard structure.
  • Top 15.2 (4 elimination rounds), which is exactly the same as the Top 7.2 system but with one additional elimination round. The top Swiss player still gets the bye if they won the last two Swiss rounds.

This happens because for those specific player ranges, one more elimination round is required to ensure that all players with an X-1 record qualify for the elimination stage.


Recommended tournament structure based on number of players. In orange cases, the organizer may add an extra elimination round and use the Top 15.2 system.

➕ Want the Full Explanation?

👉 Detailed analysis of the Top 7.2 system →