Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 09:51:48 11/30/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 30, 1999 at 12:19:45, Dave Gomboc wrote: [snip] >Round-Robin -> Swiss just doesn't make sense. If you have already had everyone >play each other once (or twice, if it's a double round-robin), why would you >then have a swiss for the top spots? Your tournament is already over. You don't have all the players participate, just the top players. Suppose you have 12 entries in a contest. They play 24 games (12 each white/black) using a round-robin format. This will determine an approximate ELO for the pool. Then, for the top 4 players, have a swiss tournament of several rounds. The goal I would like to reach is a fair tournament. In such a tournament, the best program has a good chance of winning. The separation between top programs is very small. In order to find out which one is really the best, careful design of the tournament is needed. Two or three rounds of a swiss tournament with programs of unknown strength is little more than a crap-shoot. On the other hand, the programmers are reluctant to play a lot of games. So perhaps having a 3rd or 4th place program win does not really matter. It's still a neat title to hang on the wall and it gives the underdogs a fighting chance to win.
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.