Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:17:12 06/10/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 10, 2004 at 05:14:54, Gerd Isenberg wrote: >On June 09, 2004 at 14:50:20, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On June 09, 2004 at 14:04:44, Rémi Coulom wrote: >> >>>On June 09, 2004 at 13:58:01, Dann Corbit wrote: >>> >>>>On June 09, 2004 at 08:31:16, Rémi Coulom wrote: >>>> >>>>>On June 09, 2004 at 07:59:09, Kolss wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On June 09, 2004 at 07:28:09, Rémi Coulom wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On June 09, 2004 at 05:36:44, Peter Berger wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On June 09, 2004 at 03:54:25, Mark Winands wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>2. The tournament will be an 11-round Swiss-system event, using standard >>>>>>>>>(non-accelerated) Swiss pairings. The provisional playing schedule was given on >>>>>>>>>page 293 of the December issue. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>In case there were only 13 participants I wonder if it would really be possible >>>>>>>>to do legal Swiss pairings for 11 rounds - probably not. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>If we are 13, I think it would be best to have a 12th round and play round >>>>>>>robin. The playing programme has plenty of big holes. It would be so much better >>>>>>>to play round robin, that it would be worth the effort of organizing a 12th >>>>>>>round, in my opinion. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Rémi >>>>>> >>>>>>Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>>You need 2 more rounds to make a round robin event with 13 participants (=> 13 >>>>>>rounds). I don't know whether the schedule permits for this... >>>>>> >>>>>>Munjong. >>>>> >>>>>Yes, sorry. That may still be worth the effort, though. >>>>> >>>>>Rémi >>>> >>>>A round robin will tell much more exactly what places 2-12 are, but it won't >>>>give a more precise victor and last place (which is what Swiss is designed for) >>>>unless you play more games in total. >>> >>>My main concern was about making sure that the tournament is not over after 5 >>>rounds. Pairing for round robin can be arranged so that the most important games >>>are played in the last rounds. I think this would make the tournament a lot more >>>exciting. >>> >>>Rémi >> >> >>Correct. Another alternative is to play 6 rounds where each round is a pair of >>games where each player gets black and white. That turns it into a 6 round >>event, 12 games played, but with 6 rounds the important games will be near the >>end if pairings are done sanely with none of the "flip a coin" nonsense that has >>been done in the past... > >There were other alternatives discussed before, groups and delayed swiss: > >http://chessprogramming.org/cccsearch/ccc.php?art_id=352170 Yes, but the alternative was bad. Groups play. Top few play in final rounds, leaving others to go home. The 6 round DRR format would have everyone playing 12 games, but the last 2-3 rounds would determine the winner, not the first half of the event... > >There was a poll, with the assumption to play 11 rounds. >Most programmers or potential participants prefere a 11 round swiss. I don't believe that is true. Most participants prefer to play 11 rounds period, rather than being eliminated after the first 5-6 rounds and being on the outside looking in, or in the "loser's bracket". The 1/2 RR format lets the TD set the pairings so that the first rounds always pit strong vs weak, and the last rounds pit strong vs strong, so that interest is high for the last rounds. the DRR Swiss option accomplishes the same thing and might actually be fairer since for every opponent you play, you get black _and_ white. >Let's see, the deadline is still open and there is hope we become a few more... > >Otherwise there is still the chance to pick up your interesting proposal, may be >slightly modified, where the first round is not a pair but all other 5 rounds to >achieve exactly 11 rounds. > >Gerd Any proposal is just a kludge to fix the problem: "too many rounds for the number of players for a Swiss to make sense."
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.