|
|
Back to forum Garvin Gray (2011-12-14) 5 player double round robins I am wondering if tournaments would be easier to start if instead of needing 7 players to enter to get a tournament going, this could be reduced to 5 players and be offered as a double round robin. This would mean that everyone would have to play 8 games instead of 6, but I think that would be ok in return for getting tournaments started more often. This change would also mean that colours are now irrelevant, so your starting position in the field does not matter. Entries do slow up across Christmas, as I am noticing by being the only person to enter the Standard M tournament for over a fortnight now. Don Groves (2011-12-14 10:33:41) 5 player double round robins That's an interesting proposal. I'd like to see it tried for a while to see how it works out. Don Groves (2011-12-14 10:35:28) 5 player double round robins The same idea should be tried in Go also. Some Go tournaments can be very slow to fill up to 7 players. Sebastian Boehme (2011-12-14 14:27:16) 5 player double round robins Another thing I noticed, which may be interesting....I saw that on another chess server.... As soon as you join a waiting list with already existing players on that list, then your games with them start, regardless of how many are still needed to fill up the tourney. Worth a try? Cheers, Sebi Thibault de Vassal (2011-12-14 15:39:33) 5 player double round robins Hi Sebi, sure it's an interesting system! I've explained why I was not favourable to this here though (I did not find the discussion, quite old one). In brief less excitement (IMO), games influenced by each other result, this is just too confusing & different. Same for double roound robins, I like this format much but it would slow down even more the other tournaments... Be patient guys, let's play bullet games :) Garvin Gray (2011-12-14 16:23:23) 5 player double round robins Not a big fan of the idea of games starting at different times as more players join the tournament. I could see that after a while and if a player is involved in a few tournaments, that it just feels like they are playing in different individual games, and new games join the list at random times. With the way things are done at the moment, a new set of games are started when a new tournament begins, so it is obvious that the tournament you entered has started. Garvin Gray (2011-12-14 16:25:12) 5 player double round robins Thib: Same for double roound robins, I like this format much but it would slow down even more the other tournaments... Garvin: Can you please expand on this? I am not sure how it would slow down other tournaments. Don Groves (2011-12-14 16:42:13) 5 player double round robins I don't understand that either. How would it slow them down? William Taylor (2011-12-15 10:51:25) 5 player double round robins Presumably because if people are entering the double round robin tournaments fewer people will be entering the others (so it would slow down the start of the normal tournaments even more). Garvin Gray (2011-12-15 11:50:39) 5 player double round robins Thanks William, I was not sure how Thib's comment was to be interpreted. Either the way you have, or that players will take longer to sign up to the next round robin because they have more games to play in the current tournament ie DRR 8 games, SRR 7 players 6 games each. The concept that I had envisaged is that for the higher rated divisions, at least, they would all change over to 5 players. I am not sure if there is a particular issue in the lower rating divisions, but if the same issue exists there, then they could change as well. I was not considering in my original concept that only one, either standard or rapid, would stay at 7 players and the other as 5 players. Thibault de Vassal (2011-12-15 13:11:44) 5 player double round robins Yes, William & Garvin answered to both points better than I did :) Replacing e.g. single RR standard SM tourney only by a double RR would bring some confusion in the structure... But the idea is good anyway. Maybe we could create an entire category (standard, rapid, now standard double) for double RR with only a SM class (while closing the SM class single RR)... I'm not so favourable though. What do you think? Garvin Gray (2011-12-15 18:10:53) 5 player double round robins Thib, are you saying that you are considering creating a whole new third category of chess tournaments? We currently have standard and rapid, all seven player tournaments. Are you proposing that we have a third category, which are five player double round robins? If you are proposing a whole new third category, then I am not in favour of this idea. We are having enough issues filling the tournaments we already have, I think adding a whole new set of tournaments will just make this situation worse, where players are sprinkled around the three events, but not enough join one particular one to get any of them started. We have enough players on this site that tournaments should be able to start. So it is not like we are completely short of players in certain categories. Thibault de Vassal (2011-12-15 21:00:52) 5 player double round robins I considered it a long time ago... not anymore, for the reasons you mention. Don Groves (2011-12-16 05:24:46) 5 player double round robins We are short of players in some categories, such as the Go Dan tournaments. It might be a good place to experiment with the double round robin idea. Garvin Gray (2011-12-16 12:06:21) 5 player double round robins I think it could be trialled in one of the two sections we have atm. So all divisions in either standard or rapid moves to 5 player double round robin. Could give some useful information. Btw, changing the SM tourneys does nothing for me at this stage, which was one part of the reason for suggesting this change. It would also have to apply to the M class tournaments too. Garvin Gray (2011-12-21 03:20:56) 5 player double round robins Oh btw, my standard group m tournament could have started if it was a 5 player drr ;) :P instead of having to try and drum up two more opponents :) Sebastian Boehme (2011-12-21 04:35:27) 5 player double round robins It's time for some christmas drum'n base , I heard ur drums ^^ Stephane Legrand (2011-12-21 10:27:59) 5 player double round robins Of course it is a good idea adding tournaments reduced to 5 players and offered as a double round robin! Effectively, it would slow down even more the other tournaments... but because it is actually a better solution! Garvin Gray (2011-12-21 16:51:54) 5 player double round robins DRR's are especially important in the thematic tournaments where sometimes the thematic is not a good one and one side gains a guaranteed advantage. The current thematic of f4 e5 fxe5 f6 could be a good case in point. Don Groves (2011-12-22 06:57:24) 5 player double round robins I second Stephane's comment. If all tournaments were 5 person DRRs, tournaments would begin sooner and very likely more games would played on the site. It also eliminates any perceived white/black advantage or disadvantage. Thibault de Vassal (2011-12-22 18:47:03) 5 player double round robins I agree that more regular games would be played on the site (on the white/black advantage also), but wouldn't it mean less players in the championship cycles? It would be somewhat more difficult to control the number of total running games and IMO it's less fun also but anyway I'm ready to consider a change for the whole tournaments structure (for chess & maybe Go) if most players think it's a good idea, I'll send an email to all players about that (and other things) very soon. Garvin Gray (2011-12-23 00:24:35) 5 player double round robins Thib, the proposal is only talking about the general standard/rapid and other all entry tournaments (thematic for instance). My proposal is not about changing tournaments like the ficgs world champs to 5 player drr's as they have no issues with getting players to join. Thibault de Vassal (2011-12-23 01:29:13) 5 player double round robins Sorry I was not accurate... I heard it just like you said. Don Groves (2011-12-23 06:49:43) 5 player double round robins I don't agree the change would mean fewer players in championship cycles, there would be fewer players per group but more groups. Also, championship cycles happen only once per year so they could left as is. Garvin Gray (2011-12-23 17:05:47) 5 player double round robins To try and accommodate a few concerns of some, I think there are three possible options. 1) Change both standard and rapid divisions to 5DRR. 2) Change just one of standard or rapid to 5PDRR and leave the other as 7SRR. 3) Create an entire new division with 5DRR and leave the current standard and rapid as they are. I think option 2 would be the most useful in providing information on whether the change is successful. Option 1 is the most committal, as it is changing everything. Option 3 is worth consideration, but it could lead to insufficient numbers across all three divisions. It could also 'suffer' and not provide useful feedback if the time control and rating bands chosen are not suitable. If Option 3 was considered, it would need to be something between standard and rapid, perhaps 14 days initial plus 3 days increment. Garvin Gray (2011-12-23 17:06:48) 5 player double round robins Thib, Are you able to announce a starting date for 5DRR? Something before April 1st would be good ;) Thibault de Vassal (2011-12-24 17:44:25) 5 player double round robins Maybe we have a beginning of answer in this new discussion: http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=forum_read&id=10165 Do you think that rated or unrated 5 players double round-robin would (partly) solve the problem? Scott Nichols (2011-12-28 21:21:04) 5 player double round robins Another idea which I brought up a while back is to replace the unpopular Rapid_Silver 2-man with a Rapid_Silver tournament. There would be an entry fee, say 10 E-points, with the prize money going to the winner or the top 2. It would be unrated, only need e-points to join. No rating restrictions. Players like me and Ruben and others would jump right in. It would give lower rated a chance to play the top guns. I bet a lot of them would go for it, even if it cost them some money, it could be considered like a "lesson". Plus, I'm sure the top players would go for it also, easy money! You could make it from 5 up to 11 players. Thibault de Vassal (2011-12-28 21:45:00) 5 player double round robins We agree on the idea, but do you think that it would at least partly solve the main problem of the discussion? I can prepare that within the next days. Scott Nichols (2011-12-28 22:48:20) 5 player double round robins I do think it would, at least in part solve the main problem, nothing is 100% as we are finding out on that forum tournament. I think these days, seriously, if you put 10 Chessplayers in a room, you would have 9 different opinions. Maybe we could have a test to see if any of these ideas work. We need more input... If these ideas don't work, it's no big deal. This is still the best site out there IMHO, :) Rolf Staggat (2011-12-29 01:50:42) 5 player double round robins 4 player double round robin: six games as usual absolutely fair - black and white versus each opponent Don Groves (2011-12-29 08:28:27) 5 player double round robins That would work also, Rolf. Scott: I think it's more like ask 9 players and you will get 10 opinions ;-) Garvin Gray (2011-12-29 10:24:38) 5 player double round robins I would still prefer 5 player drr's, but 4 player drr is acceptable. All I want is this idea to start, whether it is 5P, 4P or Thib's idea of Maybe we have a beginning of answer in this new discussion: http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=forum_read&id=10165 Do you think that rated or unrated 5 players double round-robin would (partly) solve the problem? ======================= The only issue I have with this idea is the unrated part. All games need to be rated. If its not rated, its not real :) and also it unrated games do not solve some of the rating band issues all of us have discussed previously. Thibault de Vassal (2011-12-29 14:48:20) 5 player double round robins I agree on "if it's not rated, it's not real" but the fact is that many players are afraid to lose many points against maybe strong 1800 players... Actually the rules evolved about 2 years ago to avoid this, ratings are quite protected (never enough) in such cases but it looks like it is not well intergrated yet. On the other hand, if there's an entry fee & prize, it's even more real... If we start with that idea, maybe it can be unrated. I'm still not sure... Your opinion for a double round robin with entry fee & money prize, should it be unrated or rated? Garvin Gray (2011-12-29 15:59:17) 5 player double round robins Off topic response- In my opinion if ratings are based on a decent system, then they do not need to be protected. If someone loses a person 600 points below them and vice versa wins, they deserve the points result that those results indicate. The issue, and I know you already know my opinion on this, is players who are put on some arbitary rating ie 1800, when their playing standard could be any number at all. If unknown players had to earn their rating through a provisional rating system, then there would not have to be as many concerns. Garvin Gray (2012-01-11 07:26:44) 5 player double round robins how is this matter going in terms of changing one of the standard/rapids to 5PDRR? No progress seems to have been made on changing it. Thibault de Vassal (2012-01-12 01:47:31) 5 player double round robins I didn't forget! The waiting list for the 1st DRR (rated, with entry fee & prize) will be open tomorrow ;)
[Chess forum]
[Rating lists]
[Countries]
[Chess openings]
[Legal informations]
[Contact]
[Social network] [Hot news] [Discussions] [Seo forums] [Meet people] [Directory] |