I’ve had the case of running quads where I could easily have added a 4th round to a quad that finished quickly and still getting it done within original completion time schedule.
Any ideas (opinions) on the right way to pair a 4th round to a quad?
I like equalizing the colors and then pairing the first board by rank.
Downside could be
o Two players in prize contention could play the two who are not.
o A pairing with same players and same colors is likely.
Others have suggested…
o Replay of first round colors reversed. 3 blacks for player #2.
o Replay of first round equalizing colors. i.e. 2-3 pairing a second time.
o Pair by rank. Possible 3 blacks.
I think you should pair the two leaders (not necessarily the two highest-rated) against each other again, reversing the colors from what they had when they played each other originally.
If this would result in 3 of the same color for one of the players, then instead pair the leader against the higher-scoring of the remaining two players.
If pairing the two leaders would result in 3 of the same color for both, then just don’t reverse the colors.
If you did have an extra round, would you be allowing it to affect prize distribution? Players who won a prize based on results of the original quad might be upset if the result of an un-advertised round reduced or eliminated the prize they had already won for the tournament that they (thought they) were entering. I think this would be a legitimate complaint.
That said, I understand that players might want to play another round if time allowed. I think a way to handle this without affecting prize distribution is, instead of having another round, to have “extra rated games”. I realize this doesn’t answer the original question of how to pair, but if the “extra round” does not affect prize distribution or final quad standings, perhaps who gets paired against who isn’t quite as important.
That’s certainly a good point. If there are prizes, any extra rounds ought to be announced in the TLA (and not made optional or conditional, such as “if time permits”). Or, the prizes could depend on just the first three rounds, as you suggest.
Along the lines of “extra games”, there’s also no reason the extra games have to be within the quad. In fact, once the tournament is over (or almost over), you could just announce, “anybody that wants to play one more game, please let me know, and stick around”, then just pair all those remaining players in sequence by rating, 1 vs 2, etc.
Thanks for all the comments.
After looking at it I now like Bill’s pairing the leaders:
o It can’t be three blacks in a row
o It is just like a 4 round swiss where 3 blacks is indeed a common situation.
Bill:
I am not sure why you don’t like “if time permits.”
It is the reason I am adding the round…
o These are scholastic quads (all tied for 1st get a trophy)
o Awards handed out after all sections are done - most kids and parents seem to like this even if it is rather informal.
o A lower rated section can have their 3 rounds done before most sections are done with 2.
o Always nice to get that 4th round in for unrated kids.
I guess a clever kid could sit on their clock to avoid the 4th round happening.
My other thought was pretty much what was suggested as extra games.
Anyone wanting to play a 4th game who is already done before the slowest quad finishes their 2nd games will get paired - pretty close to 1-2 by rating.
If a player is the sole 2.5-0.5 after three rounds then that player took first. If you add an extra round and the player loses to a 2-1, the player is now second. If you count that round in the final standings then you may have the lovely job of trying to explain to the parents of the 2.5-0.5 why thier child lost out on a first place trophy after winning the tournament. If you add the round to the quad and do NOT count them in the final standings then you may have to explain to the parents of the 3-1 child why their child did NOT get a first place trophy. If you allow the kids to play in a trophy-less extra games section and announce the extra games that way then you don’t have to worry about the effect on trophies, don’t have to worry about colors, and don’t have to worry if some of the parents want to leave early leaving only three kids from a quad (you’ll simply pair the players from multiple quads together).
Because, as you said yourself, “a clever kid could sit on their clock to avoid the 4th round happening.”
And, in fact, you can take advantage of this if you have an odd number of players. Put the extra player in the bottom “quad”, and have them play a 5-player, 4-game round robin. One player will have to sit out at first, but as soon as one of the games finishes, you can pair one of those players against the one sitting out, without having to wait for the other game to finish. Then, when the other game finally does finish, you can immediately pair one of those players against the one now sitting out, etc. By playing games at “odd moments” in this manner, you can get those 5 players to finish 4 games at least as quickly as the higher-rated players finish 3 games.
All true, although, if chessgarync is awarding multiple trophies in case of ties, I suppose he could award trophies to anybody who finishes first by either method of calculation.