|
|
|
Topic: TIE BREAK SYSTEMS IN TOURNAMENTS AT WWW.QUEENALICE.COM
| |
|
|
Author
| Message |
|---|
|
|
Miguel: Si el sistema hace la media de partidas, parece mas justo. Quizás entonces haria falta introducir, un sistema de desempate en que el último criterio no fuese el ráting del jugador.
Aunque pueda parecer reiterativo (o que te haga la pelota  - quiero decir que la web està muy bien planteada y que el sistema de torneos con un sistema u otro contribuye a que sea muy atractiva.
Alo: va, tÃo no chilles en la web (escribe en minúsculas,aunque sea el tÃtulo ).
Jesús
|
|
|
Miguel: If the system makes the stocking of departures, it seems but exactly. Maybe then it would be necessary to introduce, a system of it brakes the tie in that the last approach was not the player's ráting.
Although it can seem iterative - I mean that the web is very good outlined and that the system of tournaments with a system or another contributes to that is very attractive.
Alo: Hi, gun , doesn't screech in the web please(writes in minus,although it is the title).
També amb carinyo.
|
|
|
miguel and alopinto, i have read the tie-break rules written on "about this site" under "help" section.
in my honest opinion, how primitive the system is in breaking the tie but it was announced before the tournament has begun, then it must be JUST and FAIR to implement it.
prospectively, i suggest that joint winners should be declared joint winners. this would be the least to create complaints.
regards to everybody...
|
|
|
With every new thing we have to learn from mistakes, disagreements, arguments, etc. Tie-break systems are far from perfect in chess tournaments and for that reason one has to be real carefull of which systems to use whenever we come to a situation like the one we are facing in QA-INT-01 and AUTO-ADV-09. I will ask Miguel to reconsider the tie-break system in QA-INT-01 carefully for the reasons already expounded and that he himself acknowledged. The solution that I propose is this one:
QA-01-INT
The use of the points obtained by your opposition is not the best tie-break system for reasons already explored. As a criterium I offer the cummulative points per round as the first way to break the tie (FIDE approved) In QA-INT-01 it would have been like this:
For Alopinto:
Round 1 = 12
Round 2 = 8
Final = 2
For a total of 22 points.
In the same manner Pannonius would get:
Round 1 = 6
Round 2 = 11
Final = 2
For a total of 19 points.
It can't be any clearer and fairer! This has been acknowledged by the FIDE as well and rewards the player for going undefeated thorugh the tournament.
Miguel, I believe that in this tie-break systems issue you didn't think long and hard enough and QA-INT-01 should have been won by me.
The tie-break system that you chose is not fair and unreasonable. This tie-break system is suited for round-robin tournaments where you could get several players tied but not for a final match.
AUTO-ADV-09
In the message that you sent me regarding the tie-break of this tournament nowhere does it say that you used the average rating of the opposition and this is what you wrote:
| Lamentablemente otra vez el desempate salio en tu contra, esta vez por culpa del rating. |
| Regretfully once again the tiebreak went against you, this time due to the rating. |
This is totally different from what you state in the forum where you claim to have used the average rating. You have quouted the FIDE for tie-break systems and in this thread you mentioned the use of averaged ratings, I would like to ask you please to provide the average rating before the tournament started per FIDE rules. Mandaragit and I played exactly the same number of games so that the sum of ratings doesn't need to be averaged (it will be the same number divided by the same number of games.)
I ask for this because this is what is stated at the about section:
| Rating: The player with the highest rating will be the winner. |
And we very well know that this is totally bogus and doesn't conform to any tie-break system from either the FIDE or the USCF!
The average rating of the opponents for Mandaragit and myself has not been reported thus far and from the message that you sent me, where the words "average rating" or "sum of opponent's ratings" do not appear leads me to conclude that this matter was not resolved in the best possible manner. FIDE's tiebreak system states that the ratings that have to be used are the ones before the tournament started.
The use of the ratings of the players as a tie-break system is totally erroneous. I am sorry Miguel but that's unacceptable. And although now you say that has been written there before the tournament started and that I can't honestly attest to that now, my trust is at a very low point and after seeing you contradict yourself in this forum using the word "averaged ratings" and the message that you sent me... I can only ask for the average rating figure to be supplied...
After reading the tie-break system as "random") I considered it totally unacceptable and I am lead to believe that this was a last minute fix...
Sorry Miguel, this is an opportunity to improve and not just another "rompebolas jodiendo" (couldn't translate that one)
Alopinto
|
|
|
Alopinto, your messages are too long and tiring to read. I don't like your attitude, you are not being constructive and you continue to think that I have something against you which is completely false.
Your last tournament had two tie-breaks. The first tie-break was for averaged opponent score (did I mistakenly use the word "ratings" instead of "scores" before? Maybe I did, you should know better than to accuse me of contradicting myself!!!). On that one both you and mandaragit got 700 points. The second tie-break function is the rating.
Your proposed new tie-break system doesn't solve a thing, try to think globally, not just for your own tournaments. You just found a metric that favors you, but next time another player who feels so strongly about winning gets hurt by it we will have the same discussion again.
|
| Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next |
|
|
|
