Since I’m seeing purely emotional arguments for preventing ID, it’s not likely that any argument will work. However, out of my own curiosity, I ran a couple of scenarios for a 32-player tournament, to see if an ID would *actually* manipulate the tournament results.

First, I did it with players only sweeping their opponents. In the fifth round, there are two people with 16 points. If they ID, both make the cut, being the highest number of points at 18. If they did not ID, and one of them got swept, then we would have 1 person at 20, and five players at 16. Both of the players involved in the ‘Do I ID?’ decision made the cut even if one of them was swept. More importantly, there were 8 people at 12 points after round 4; they do not want to ID because there would be 8 people at 14 after round 5, so it would go to tiebreaks, which if it would go to tiebreakers, people won’t ID.

First caveat: This was a tournament with only sweeps and no splits. That’s not likely to ever happen.

Second caveat: It was an exact power of 2 for the number of players, which does affect the math. This is rare.

(I ran another scenario where 32 players, and half of all the matches split and half of them sweep… After round 4, there’s still two people who are guaranteed into the cut even if one of them is swept, so an ID from those two players doesn’t affect the tournament. It was complicated. I suspect that most, if not all, tournaments end up in this position. And ultimately, if you are unsure whether you’re guaranteed for the cut, you shouldn’t ID.)

Ultimately, allowing ID is a function to allow people who don’t need to play a game, to not be required to play a game.