Author: Uri Blass
Date: 23:59:08 01/19/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 19, 2003 at 21:23:11, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 19, 2003 at 18:31:55, Russell Reagan wrote: > >>On January 19, 2003 at 18:18:00, Sune Larsson wrote: >> >>> means Ruffian/Crafty/Yace sharing 1st place with 7/9 >> >>Crafty beat both Yace and Ruffian. Ruffian beat Yace, and Yace lost to both >>Crafty and Ruffian. So, Crafty should be the winner. Or are they playing tie >>breakers? > > >That's not really done in swiss events. The tie-break for this event >was (IMHO) not very well thought-out. IE who wants to use blitz games to >settle the final standings of a long time-control tournament? > >I would suggest the following for future CCT events. > >If two are tied for first, have a play-off game, same time control. > >If more than two are tied, either use a traditional tie-break or forget >about it. IE at the ACM events, we had "co-champions" that were ranked by >the tie-break scores. We never had playoffs at any ACM event, nor at any >WCCC event I attended although I do remember at least one tie-break with >Belle playing, probably in 1980. > >But in any case, blitz games for a standard time control tournament makes >no sense, no matter how you look at it. If nobody is happy using the >normal sum of opponents scores, which is really pretty useless when you have >too many rounds as we do, then co-champions would be the simplest and most >accurate outcome. > >Other points to ponder: > >1. too many rounds. You really want to have log2(entries) rounds, rounded >up to a integer. For 48 players, that would be 6 rounds. The more rounds >held _beyond_ that, the more likely there is to have a log-jam at the top >since the top players can not play each other a second time, and they will >end up playing lower rated players, giving more a chance to join them. I do not think so. I think that there is another problem and it is too many rounds for a day. The result is that it seems that some programmers(not me) went to sleep and could not watch their games. I know that in the olimpiads there are 13 or 14 rounds and the number of teams is even less than 2^8=256. I suggest the following for next time: 1)only 2-3 rounds per day. 2)the tournament is going to be played in 2 weekends. Another idea is to do a similiar tournament with 135 30 time control but only one game per month when every player has to agree to play in 5 out of 9 or 4 our of 7 possible dates so always there is a date that both sides agree to play. The dates can be chosen all as 9:00 am new york clock sarurday and sunday. 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.