Author: Theo van der Storm
Date: 03:36:50 08/16/05
Go up one level in this thread
On August 15, 2005 at 22:08:36, Robert Hyatt wrote: >First, I'd hope anyone would agree that two consecutive blacks in the first two >rounds of a swiss event is unheard of. So that's a seed for doubt. > >Now, why do I need to spend an hour with swiss perfect, trying to see if there >is any possible seeding order that could produce the same pairings for the first >two rounds (there isn't). > >Why shouldn't the ICGA say "this is going to look strange to the public, so >let's put an explanation on the web site to let everyone know that we are using >a round-robin pairing, that has been modified to put the "interesting" games in >the final few rounds." > >Explanations eliminate speculation. > >But we are getting zero explanations or other information from them. > >Does that seem reasonable? Compare it to the CCT events we have done on ICC, >for example. > >Then perhaps you will understand how such threads get started, because we are >living in a complete information blackout from the ICGA... > >This could be corrected, but so far it has not been, and it has been systemic >for several years now... I must say this note by you is already much better. Perhaps you are beginning to understand that the phrase "brain transplant" is not a good starter for a FRUIT-ful discussion. The ICGA changed the schedule for the meeting and already held it (Zap!). They are also providing more info now and display a sense of humour: It's in PDF, so we can't copy it for web purposes :-) http://www.ru.is/wccc05/default.asp?Page=Notepad&ID=3 Theo
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.