Wow, I was not expecting you would plead for draw offers in football ...
Please notice that I don't want to force people to play aggressively, I have no idea where you took that from.

> Please, let's keep it related to WBCCC

Then I guess none of the points from the quote you gave apply here!?

> What about the WBCCC? Because, unless you are claiming soccer players play two matches simultaneously, your analogy doesn't work.

In fact, I think this provides one more reason to have Sofia rules in place in the WBCCC. By making a short draw, you double the resources available for the remaining game. (I recall that on a number of occasions, players explicitly stated that this is their motivation for making a short draw.) Don't you think this is a bit unfair towards their remaining opponent who has to deal with two games at a time?

Anyway, I was under the impression that a number of players were in favor of ruling out not fought-out draws. (By the way, I recall there were quite a number of these in WBCCC1.) Since I am not even a player, my opinion doesn't count.

I won't comment to much about the draw rules, but I think the most important thing is to still together! There are some few of you at this point. Don't let a good thing go to waste.

Some stats to show how WBCCC 2011 would have come out with 3 different scoring systems. (top 12 places only)

                                             Scoring systems

Player          Standard               3/1/0               .9/1.1/.4/.6

ppipper         7.5                       20                   7.5
Fulcrum2000  6.0                       14                   6.0
Weirwindle     6.0                       14                   5.9
Sebi             6.0                       14                   5.9
Ruben           6.0                       15                   6.1
National12     6.0                       14                   6.0
Jitan             5.5                       12                   5.4
Evans           5.5                       13                   5.6
Donkasand     5.5                       12                   5.5
Stephanie      5.5                       13                   5.4
Balabachi       5.5                       12                   5.5
ParmetD        5.5                       13                   5.4

Since the tide is running towards the traditional scoring system, I will take the 3/1/0 position and try and explain some of the benefits.

In 2011, we were fortunate to have a clear leader early on, which meant everyone had to play catch up, so for some players a draw and a loss were the same result ie it put them out of contention for first.

In 2012, it is highly likely that there will be no clear leader for most, if not all of the event. Perhaps the winner might only have a score of 7/12. This means losses are going to hurt and a draw is a very good result. I do 'fear' that players will start drawing more games, or more accurately, not doing everything they can to try and win a game, if this means taking a risk and losing a game.

Chess players by their very nature are loss adverse and so the rewards for winning and losing games needs to be higher than drawing games.

I take the point that under 310 that time outs and forfeits could have an impact, but as this is most likely going to occur in games 1 and 2, or maybe 3 and 4, they will just get pushed up a few spots higher than normal. If it occurs in the last two games, then the effect is actually the same, as the leading contenders under 310 will be on about 20/30 after 10 games.

One of the biggest advantages of the 310 system, is that it does not require any special anti draw rules. Players are still free to short draw a game if they wish, but the scoring system encourages players to play their games out and try and win as a win/loss is higher than two draws.