Author: Jens Kahlenberg
Date: 00:46:49 07/12/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 11, 2004 at 15:07:01, Amir Ban wrote: >On July 11, 2004 at 14:46:08, Jens Kahlenberg wrote: > >>1. ParSOS - Junior >>2. Falcon - Shredder >>3. Jonny - Fritz >>4. Crafty - Woodpusher 1997 >>5. The Crazy Bishop - Deep Sjeng >>6. FIBChess - Diep >>7. IsiChess - Movei >> >>Would be feasible pairings according to FIDE-rules for swiss pairing system >>(Manila '92). I wonder what kind of tournament software is used in Ramat-Gan?! >>Round 9 and especially round 7 were a little bit "ugly" too. >> > >I agree. I think the pairing software give precedence to getting colors right. >At this stage of the tournament this is utterly wrong priority. The leaders >should get the strongest challenge that remains, and this is much more important >than that say IsiChess get the right number of whites/blacks. > >Amir Ok... let's force the color difference to zero as a requirement for round 10. So _everybody_ would have played 5 games with white and 5 games with black after the following feasible seeding 1. Falcon - Shredder 2. Movei - Junior 3. Fritz - Diep 4. Crafty - The Crazy Bishop 5. IsiChess - Deep Sjeng 6. Jonny - Woodpusher 1997 7. FIBChess - ParSOS Looks even nicer in my eyes :-) IMHO tournament software of Ramat Gan has to be substituted for WCCC 2005 because it seems to be _very_ unsuitable for small tournaments with many rounds like the WCCC 2004. Perhaps the chosen software is ok for large opens but for Ramat Gan it wasn't feasible.
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.