Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: CCT!!!

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 12:59:24 11/17/04

Go up one level in this thread


On November 17, 2004 at 14:43:43, Albert Silver wrote:

>On November 17, 2004 at 13:28:33, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On November 17, 2004 at 12:45:58, Anthony Cozzie wrote:
>>
>>>Well, it is rapidly becoming that CCT time of year.
>>>
>>>I just wanted to get a little bit of discussion going on who is going to attend,
>>>format, potential organizers, etc.  I emailed Volker Richey, who did an
>>>excellent job the last two years, but I haven't heard back from him.  It is
>>>possible I used the wrong email (cct@vrichey.de), so if anyone knows a better
>>>one please speak up.
>>>
>>>Some thoughts:
>>>
>>>1. Timecontrol.  Last we had some problems with some _long_ games (Movei the
>>>Ironman comes to mind), and the first night ended up being pretty late for the
>>>guys in Europe.  Perhaps it is better to to just have a Game/60 timecontrol?  I
>>>like to have increments myself, but at the same time it is nice to know that all
>>>games _will_ be finished by time X.  I'm sort of on the fence here.
>>>
>>>2. Tiebreaks.  Some would call this a bit of sour grapes, but I don't like the
>>>idea of a slow tournament being decided by a few blitz games.  I would much
>>>prefer a buchholz or SB ranking, or even just having a shared first place.  This
>>>isn't a world championship, so there is no reason we can't make as many people
>>>happy as possible :)
>>
>>I've been involved in the tie-breaks multiple times now.  I agree.  Get rid of
>>the blitz play-off.  Let's just have co-champions.  Without proper seeding, even
>>the traditional tie-breaks are not so good.  Or, have a playoff at the _same_
>>time control as the regular games, but only if there are two tied and not more.
>>Then we could play two games to eliminate white-bias.
>
>I have a suggestion regarding this, which is exactly how I think the genuine
>human WC should be decided (as opposed to this grossly unfair draw favoring the
>champion). In the event the 2 games do not provide a winner, use the now defunct
>Golden Goal system from World Cup (soccer) events: the first to draw blood wins.
>
>There may be an element of luck involved in who would get white or black in the
>first game, but all in all I think it still allows a satisfactory champion at
>the end.
>
>                                           Albert
>

Sounds ok to me.  Flip for color, and start playing until a game is won?

Only downside is that it is certainly possible (and even probable) to have an
extended tie-breaker. :)

>>
>>
>>>
>>>3. Date.  I have no problems with January myself.
>>>
>>>4. Participants.  If we extrapolate linearly, there will be >60 participants
>>>this CCT!  Who is coming?
>>>
>>>5. Organizers.  I'm certainly not going to do it :)  Volker did an excellent job
>>>last year, but it is matter of getting in touch with him.  I think Steve Lim
>>>talked about doing it last year as well.
>>>
>>>anthony



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.