Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 13:14:45 11/12/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 12, 2003 at 14:51:11, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On November 12, 2003 at 01:36:03, Hans Meiser wrote: > >>Hi, >> >>http://www.vrichey.de/cct6/ >> >>The Problem of the tie-break: >> >>Suggestion: >>(1) two programs tied for the first place >> a normal game 45 15 between the two leaders. >> if draw two games 5 3 round robin >> >>(2) three programs tied for the first place >> Six games 5 3 round robin >> >>best regards >>volker > > >My suggestion: > >two tied, a normal 45/15 game. If draw, we just have "co-champions". > >three tied. three rounds of 45/15. a plays b, b plays c c plays a. >If any ties are left, we have co-champions. > >Otherwise, let's play blitz from the start. I see no valid reasoning to >use blitz to tie-break a "standard time-control" event. Having co-champions >is (IMHO) better than a crap-shoot blitz match, where quick searches often >lead to wins/losses that have little to do with the actual playing skill of >the programs being used.. What is the fundamental difference between searching to ply 11 and ply 15? IIRC you have sad you _don't_ believe in "tactical barriers" :) Anyway, I see no difference and I don't believe blitz would be any more of a crap-shoot than longer time controls (unless you can prove variance is smaller at longer TC?). -S.
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.