For 2014, we could change to playing the event as a round robin, with the pairings only being released two or three games at a time, similar to what we have now. This would minimise the impact of forfeited games as they would be spread across all opponents, but would not help with games lost/won by mouseslips, move input errors.
With a round robin, I could publish the pairings for the full year at the start of the year, advertise the prospective starting dates etc for the next round etc.
Please do not take my bringing this issue up again as me having a preference one way or another. It is a matter of attempting to try and solve the issues as they come up in the best way possible. This could be worth a try for 2014.
Just my 2 cents
> Don't care any format ok!
Ok then, straight knockout
>Ok then, straight knockout
Always a fav of mine except today with the engines what do you do with the pair of players that go draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,draw,
So if we get over 22 entries, then it will be back to the standard swiss pairings we have now.
>So if we get over 22 entries, then it will be back to the standard swiss pairings we have now.
What about 2 divisions and the two winners play off for the title?
The formats under consideration are either the current model, or single group round robin.
Two groups, or anything similar raises so many issues that it actually defeats most of the goals that we are trying to get rid of. For instance in two groups of 11, what happens if there are four withdrawals in one group, but none in another? And with those four withdrawals, one player gets left with five blacks and one white, where as another player gets left with five whites, one black. Hardly fair is it? And easily preventable.
And what about group weightings? It is would be very likely that one group could be much stronger than the other, leading to disenchantment with the whole event from players who believe (rightly or wrongly) that they were denied a fair chance of winning because of the group they were allocated. Group then a final format is mainly used when time or table space is limited, meaning the number of total games has to be limited. The number of games per round for us can be unlimited, just as long as each individual person is only playing 2 to 4 games at a time. 2 being the optimal.
Sorry, but the only two formats that provide anything close to equal chance are the current format with constrants we have to work with, and round robin, again with the constrants in place. They are simple to understand, easy to explain. And when starting the competition provide an almost equal opportunity for everyone to win.
the pairings are easy and can be made in advance for the whole year. 2. Most players have way more than 2 games going at once at all the different sites, I keep on the average about 30
going at the same time. So if the group is large, like say 32, I would keep 4 games going continuously. 3. If some players finish fast and they haven't played yet, they could start playing
immediately without waiting for the next round to start. I don't just mean fast players would finish fast, it's a fact that some games finish fast and others take far longer depending
on the nature of the game. These are the positives.
Now the problems I can think of: 1. Dadi might not want to mess with games starting at different times all year long. 2. If there were 32 players it would mean everyone would have to
play a total of 31 games, np for me, but others may object to the heavy load.
Ben's idea of a knockout also appeals to me, a series of short (4 games?) matches with just the winner moving on, and make the final a little longer, say 6 to 8 games. But even this has
drawbacks, like in a case of a tie match, who moves on etc.
In closing, most of us agree we like the RR. In the case of dropouts, their score should be null for all games even if he has finished some. And I really doubt if we would get 32 players.
A small entry fee would keep out the looky-loos and be forfeited in case of a dropout. All proceeds to go as prizes. Just one opinion, thanks. Scott
I've been a lurker in this forum for quite some time and I'm interested in playing the 2014 tour. Am I right to believe that it is open for everyone? My only concern would be the client used. I have only played through web servers so far, but I guess it's not difficult to setup and use.
Just don't enter unless you can commit to the games..
Yes, I am sure I can commit barring some unpredictable health disaster. Of course the 1 hour-only increment will be a new situation for me but I hope I will get used to it
> for an LSS and ICCF player this time control feels like bullet chess :)
That is part of the challenge, , especially if you're used to iccf. They are soooo slow. This tour is the World Corr. Chess Blitz Ch.
But we never seem to have time problems like David says, and just because it's fast doesn't mean it's not strong. It's one of the strongest tours around.
And the new round robin format has many excited,
But you will need to use your real name.
Round Robin is always preferable since it gives you the chance to do proper preparation for all opponents.
I have no problem whatsoever to use my real name. I find it hard to understand why would that be an issue.
> I have no problem whatsoever to use my real name. I find it hard to understand why would that be an issue.
History of correspondence chess, and history of this event. On servers like playchess, many participants use handles as they are testing out their books and tuning their engines, working on new potential discoveries. So when this event in 2010 was being first developed, it was felt that making players having to reveal their real name on the forum to all as a condition of entry was too onerous and against the spirit of the event. That was the belief at that time. It was felt that these players would not enter if they had to reveal their names as it would give away their identity on playchess, making their handles pointless.
As time has gone on, some people have used the anonymity of being 'just a handle' to attack other participants and some kibitzers have done the same. So it was made a condition of entry for the 2013 event that all players had to list their real name to enter the event and this would be listed in the list of players (cross table for the complete event).
The tone of discussions has also improved markedly this year, with most discussions becoming much more polite. This does not mean that participants have not been forthright in their opinions, but some of the hostility of the past has gone. I do not think it is a stretch to say it is harder to abuse someone when you actually know who they are, rather than just some anonymous handle that you will probably never deal with again.
We also saw the opportunity that came from using real names to promote the event. Prospective players are more likely to enter an event if they can recognise that good players have entered. A bunch of anonymous handles will never achieve this.
For 2014, all players will need to complete an entry form, which will contain information such as your real name, address, contact phone number, email address and another person to contact in case we can not get in contact with you. This information will only be kept by the organisers and will only be used for this purpose. Only your real name will be publically displayed.
As you might have noticed from this years event, we did have a player die during the event, and it took over two months to find out about it. It was only that Salvador won a prize in 2012 that I had a postal address for him, otherwise we would still be none the wiser. Also not knowing this had an effect on the pairings for the rest of the event.
An analysis of some of the long time controls on some sites has shown that it is likely that most players are not using much more time on their games than they would if they were playing in this event, except that they have jammed themselves up with so many games. In this event everyone's attention is focused so much more. Hence the quality.
Also, on most sites, players can just wander from round robin group division to round robin group division, so it can be a case of just playing one game after another and they can start to melt into just a series of never ending games. With this event, there is a clear start and stop to each round, updated cross table, and new pairings released. And so direct feedback to how everyone is going. It is amazing how quickly this focuses everyone's attention.
The testing process is required so we can get new players to test out the program, learn to make moves, input conditional variations, how to offer draws etc and also to show that each new player is able to keep up with the pace of play required. Whilst we want heaps of entries, we would rather not accept a few questionable entries, than enter them and have them forfeit games through not been able to complete their games inside the time limit, or they just lose interest after the initial enthusiasm wears off. Hence why the testing process is in place.
The event lasts twelve months and we expect everyone who starts the event, to complete it.
The time control might be bullet like, but the only bullets that will be flying will be in the direction of those who withdraw for no good reason, just disappear with no explanation, or just time out games in lost positions.
> Can Xfccplay be used as a stand-alone client?
Well I couldn't agree more to what you have said so far.
Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill