Median and Modified Median inequity with byes

[Smythe_Dakota]

@GrantPerks

… I see the Tournament Direction forum as an advice area for tournament directors, not as an area to get the attention of the Executive Board and Delegates. …

Tournament Direction is obviously the proper forum for a discussion of tournament rules.

Even when the discussion morphs from existing tournament rules to proposed tournament rules, it still belongs in Tournament Direction. It’s preferable to catch the attention of the Rules Committee rather than the Executive Board in such areas.

EB-originated (or, worse yet, Delegate-originated) motions – whether in the areas of rules, ratings, finances, or anything else – which have not been run through the appropriate committees, have a long history of being stupid, vague, impossible to interpret, and at odds with common sense. Please, let’s run them past the specialists first.

Bill Smythe

[e4e5]

Grant said:

Tie-breaks come into play more in scholastic events than adult events. Although I have won a few trophies as an adult on tie-breaks. As you point out, scholastic events have more provisional and unrated players. Since the pre-tournament rating information is not established and beginners improve rapidly, pre-tournament and performance ratings seem useless to breaking ties.

All the listed methods are USEFULL in breaking ties, they work.
All the listed methods are USELESS in determining the strongest player among equals in a single event.

[nolan]

If you really want to find the strongest player, try using arm wrestling as a playoff.

I find the argument that trophies are cheap, so order extras, unpersuasive, and one usually made by someone who isn’t paying for the trophies in the first place and doesn’t have to store the left over ones or pay to ship tropies to players afterwards.

One of the reasons I alway use ‘common game’ as the first tiebreak is because it is the one that makes the most sense to players and especially to parents: Jimmy beat Johnny, so Jimmy gets the trophy. In my experience it only resolves about a third of the ties, though.

I have on occasion thought about setting up some chess puzzles and the kid who solves the puzzles fastest wins the trophy. The 8 queens puzzle would be a good one for that.

[Grant_Perks]

@mike

One of the reasons I alway use ‘common game’ as the first tiebreak is because it is the one that makes the most sense to players and especially to parents: Jimmy beat Johnny, so Jimmy gets the trophy. In my experience it only resolves about a third of the ties, though.

I have on occasion thought about setting up some chess puzzles and the kid who solves the puzzles fastest wins the trophy. The 8 queens puzzle would be a good one for that.

today I tied for first in a open tournament. It was a three way tie with an 1800, 1500 and myself. I lost to the 1800 who lost to the 1500 who lost to an 1100 who lost to an 800 who I beat. So would the “common game” tie-break give the award to the 1500 since he beat the 1800 who beat me?

[nolan]

Common game works best when there are just two tied players. If there are three players, it only works if one of the players played and defeated both of the other two. (Or at least that’s how I interpret it.)

That’s part of the reason why in my experience common game only breaks the tie about a third of the time. But when it does break the tie, it is something players (and especially parents) understand and usually agree with.

Try explaining modified median to a parent who is upset that his kid didn’t get the trophy.