Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:42:07 08/29/00
Go up one level in this thread
On August 29, 2000 at 14:23:01, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On August 29, 2000 at 14:04:26, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On August 29, 2000 at 12:21:16, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>I think that the pairing in the last round was fair because >>>zchess had weaker opponents than Sos(even after the last round I found that Sos >>>had a better opponents score. >>> >>>The sum of Sos opponent score is 39.5 when the sum of zchess oppont score was >>>only 36. >>> >>>Zchess cannot complain about unjustice in the pairing. >>> >>>The program that can complain about unjustice not because of the pairing is >>>insomniac that is the real amatuer world champion. >>> >>>Sos is sold as part of the young talent and by definition is a professional >>>program. >>> >>>Chessbase could do it amatuer by not selling it before the WMCCC but they did >>>not do it. >>> >>>Uri >> >> >>I disagree with the pairing comment. Pairing is an _exact_ methodology. There >>is no room to shuffle things to produce what someone thinks would be the most >>interesting matches. You seed the programs, then the pairings are automatic >>from that point forward, based on wins, losses, draws, and initial seeding >>number. >> >>We never had this problem when Mike Valvo and David Levy ran the events as TDs, >>I wonder what has changed to cause the problems in the last few events? :) > >Exactly. The correct pairing was Zchess-SOS, no discussion there. >Only v/d Herik found it was different better. Obviously chessbase >needed a title and v/d herik is no arbiter. > >I don't know Valvo nor Levy as TDs, but Levy has IM behind his name. He sure >would have remembered how you pair. Both are IMs. On rare occasions they made pairing errors. When we would point them out, they would instantly fix them if they confirmed it was an error.
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.