Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 14:50:57 07/16/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 16, 2002 at 17:01:16, Kevin Strickland wrote:
>Hello all again,
>
>This is what I am proposing and looking for feedback on:
>
>There will be a series of 4 qualification tournaments via ICC. Programs that
>enter _must_ be operated by the author or someone involved it the project.
What are the qualification tournaments?
What if one of the top 3 cannot go, will the 4th place finisher be an alternate?
Are the tournaments geographical, or simply periodic so that as many as possible
can enter?
>The top 3 entries from each tournament will be invited to attend the WCCC in
>North America.
>
>Once a program wins a specific tournament it can not enter the ones after it.
If you lose a tournament, can you enter another? This requirement is confusing.
>Time controls for the ICC events will be 120 mins with a 10 second increment.
>
>I have removed the book rule as there are so many people who use books by one
>book author, so trying to restrict it would be insane to do.
>
>The WCCC would be held in Edmonton, August 1 - 4 2003. All other conditions in
>the previous post about the event will stand as is with the following
>inclusions:
>
>1. There will be a prize fund. Amount has yet to be determined.
>2. There will be media coverage.
>3. Games will be relayed live via the internet. Quite possibly on ICC.
>4. As the tournament will be played on the August long weekend here,
>participants are invited to attend a CFL football game on the Saturday night.
>Tickets of course will be supplied.
>
>Does this seem more reasonable, and possible?
Suggestion for a future tournament:
Have a swiss tournament between the 12 finalists.
The top 4 finishers have a 2 games against each opponent round robin.
The round-robin of 4 determines places 3 & 4.
In the event of a 3 or 4 way draw, blitz games will create the placments.
The top 2 finishers have a 6 game finals for the championship.
In the event of a draw, a blitz match will create the winner.
I mention this for the future, because it will take a week to run.
I would play the games at (40/2 + rest of Game in 30 min) without the increment,
or it will be possible to get some {on rare occasions} incredibly long games.
It might be good to get some programmer feedback on this, because I know that
some programmers have a huge resistance to very long tournaments.
But I like the idea of having a real champion (with most of the randomness
removed).
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.