Author: Uri Blass
Date: 09:41:09 03/29/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 29, 2002 at 12:13:41, Roy Eassa wrote: > >A theory on this topic: > >The GM should get a small fixed stipend just for playing, plus $0 for each loss, >$x for each draw as White (where x is very small and perhaps 0), $y for each >draw as Black (where y is still pretty small, but larger than x), and $z for >each win (where z is much greater than y). Finally, a BIG bonus for winning the >match overall seems to make sense. > >That would seem to be real incentive to play his (or her) best every game. > >(Feel free to substitute pounds, Euros, whatever!) > > >Another (better?) approach is to reward only the final score. Besides a small >fee for showing up and playing, a GM score of 25% or less is no money, 100% is >BIG money, and the payments are distributed logically between these two extremes >(but the payoff for doing well should increase faster than linearly, IMHO). If the target is to encourage the GM to do the best then I think that payoff that increase linearly is a good idea. If the payoff increase faster than linearly then the GM may take unnecessary risks. The GM may prefer a strategy that give her(him) 30% chances to win and 40% chances to lose in the game and not 10% chances to win and 10% chances to lose that is more logical. Uri
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.