Author
| Message |
|---|
|
|
The system for breaking ties in tournaments is not what is defined in "About This Site." Can someone explain what this is:
http://queenalice.com/tournament.php?id=6432&round=4
It is comparing "Averaged opponent score (x1000)."
The defined tie breaking procedure is:
When two or more players obtain the same score in the final round of a tournament, the following tie-break methods will be applied in order:
Rating: The player with the highest rating will be the winner.
Random: A random player will be the winner.
|
|
|
The average opponent score would be a fine method.
The player with the highest rating is the worst possible method.
|
|
|
Check again.
|
|
|
So this criterion was added:
"Averaged opponent score: This value is computed by adding the scores obtained by all the opponents in all rounds (ignoring the games played against the player) and dividing the total by the number of games played. The player with the highest value will be the winner, presuming that he/she had a tougher competition."
I happened upon that same sentence an old posting on the topic a while back. I tried to find a way to interpret it that would result in the scores seen in the link in my original post, but could not. I would appreciate it if anyone could explain the calculation in detail.
|
|
|
The average opponent score is actually a horrible method.
The average score when my opponents play each other is 50%. I can increase my average opponents score by losing to them. The best possible result is to be the lone person in my score group to advance, but advance with the lowest possible score. If I win my first 5 games it is always better to draw the 6th than to win it.
|
|
|
Finally, an answer! You reinspired me to try to reverse engineer the scores in the tournament I cited above and I finally succeeded. To get the numbers to work I have to include the games my opponent and I played against each other in the final round, which seems to contradict the description, but so be it. In short, my opponents scored 45 points in 38 games, giving me an average opponent score of 1000*45/38 = 1184.2. The other finalist's opponents scored 58 points in 48 games, which gives a score of 1000*58/48 = 1208.3. As it happens, the other finalist did draw one game in the first round. If he had won that game instead, his opponent score would have been 1000*57/48 = 1187.5. So he did in fact benefit from drawing rather than winning, but he would have won the tiebreaker anyway.
|
|
