Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    CC International Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,399

    Accelerating 1 or 2 rounds in a 7 round Swiss

    Please can anyone tell me the pro's and con's of accelating rounds in Swiss tournaments and your opinion of it.

  2. #2
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,308
    Quote Originally Posted by bergil
    Please can anyone tell me the pro's and con's of accelating rounds in Swiss tournaments and your opinion of it.
    Hello Bergil,

    Acceleration is ok as it lessens the effect of the first round and some time second round mismatches, known on here as 'junk rounds'.

    Even though the first two rounds are ok, the mismatches return in round 3. To reduce the mismatch effect in round 3, i recommend a 1 point acceleration if my memory serves me correctly.

    That is if you want to use acceleration. Do you want any further information or more detail? I think most tournaments that dont use the 1 division monster swiss style use divisions instead of acceleration.

    Are you thinking of acceleration for the Fairfield Summer and Winter cups?

  3. #3
    CC Grandmaster Alan Shore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Crane, Poole & Schmidt
    Posts
    3,871
    I believe you want this thread: http://www.chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=229

    Now you can sit down, get comfortable, perhaps grab a beer, and read through all 646 posts.

    Alternatively, you can take my word, that accelerated swiss events take all the fun out of an open chess tournament - with no warm-up rounds and little chance to take a big scalp: something I'm sure we all dream of doing when we enter.

    In short - acc. swiss bad.
    "I can't go back to yesterday because I was a different person then."
    - White Queen, Alice through the Looking-Glass

  4. #4
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,353
    Firstly there is no reason at all to accelerate for just one round because if you do this you will get the same matchups in round 2 you would have had in round 1. Always accelerate for at least 2 rounds in a 7-round swiss and do not accelerate for more than 5. (Typically you will not need to go that far because all the players from the bottom half will fall off the top scoregroup much earlier.)

    Pros:

    * Avoids unequal matchups in round 1, which some players may find boring or demoralising.
    * Finds a winner faster. Good where the number of players you have is very large for the number of rounds.
    * Ensures winner has been thoroughly tested against strong opponents.

    Cons:

    * Many computer programs do not implement it properly, eg the Swiss Perfect method is defective and can result in huge mismatches.
    * Tends to lead to a more tightly packed field at the end. Poor for sorting places in the midfield and ratings prizes.
    * Reduces the chances for weak players to improve their game by playing much stronger players.
    * When you come off the acceleration you tend to get some mismatches. However they are not as bad as round 1 in the normal Swiss, no matter what some here may say.
    * Works very badly if there are a lot of unrated players or a lot of ratings are unreliable.

    I personally prefer to avoid acceleration and will use it only where the first round would otherwise be a completely uncompetitive joke or where there will not be enough time to sort the winners without it.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  5. #5
    CC International Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wynyard,Tas
    Posts
    2,422
    I'm sure everybody know my opinion but I'll repeat it anyway.

    If you want to have a series of games of no great significance in combination, then accelerated pairings are fine, you will get more closely-matched games. The flip side as mentioned is that lower ranked players miss their one game against a big name.

    But if it's something that matters, like a championship or a weekend tournament that people are taking seriously, then I don't believe it's appropriate. Giving a player a weaker opponent than they are due simply because they would lose against their correct opponent amounts to a handicap system.

    In any case what is the purpose of throwing everybody into a single large group, which implies that they are fit to be matched together, and then trying to keep them apart, implying that they are not. If the disparity across the field is so great that it is a waste of time people pairing the top and bottom halves then it is better to play in two groups. No other sport wants to match seasoned internationals with rank beginners in the same group.

  6. #6
    CC International Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,399
    Thank you all for your views so far, I was interested as a few people have mentioned it to me for weekend tournaments.
    I

    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    Are you thinking of acceleration for the Fairfield Summer and Winter cups?
    Just after info and opinion at the moment.

  7. #7
    Account Permanently Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,680

    OK...I hear the solution (proposed); but what were the problems?

    Quote Originally Posted by bergil
    Please can anyone tell me the pro's and con's of accelating rounds in Swiss tournaments and your opinion of it.
    hi bergil

    I am reading your post that seems to ask what is our opinion on a solution, but which does not seem to define the problem.
    So, let me take a guess > you are concerned by personal evidence, or related anecdote, that a large standard SWISS has two main faults that are disliked by many players
    1) the first two to three rounds are junk rounds where the average rating difference in the pairings is greater than 450 rating points
    2) even in a nine round SWISS, the yo-yo effect, where players are successively paired against a much higher opponent followed by a much lower opponent, persists for the top quartile of players into the 7th and even the 8th round.
    If my guess is correct, read on.
    If I have the wrong problem, feel free to ask again.

    Is acceleration a solution to these two problems?
    I don't think Ian Rout sees acceleration as a solution to these two problems.
    I don't think Belthasar regards these are problems. So, naturally does not support acceleration.
    I think gg'' is remarking that a better solution is to create tourney divisions rather than to accelerate.
    I think KB's general experience and choice is to avoid acceleration.

    Locally, we don't accelerate.
    We do frequently split the field into Divisions, and this mitigates greatly the two problems you may have been addressing.

    regards
    starter
    Last edited by ursogr8; 08-06-2005 at 01:51 PM.

  8. #8
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,308
    Since accelerated pairings have popped up again in the WTM thread, thought I would dig this thread out instead of us bombarding that thread with some dry stuff.

    I am curious about Kevin's comments about acceleration and how it actually is supposed to work and sp's defects in this department.

    I had thought you apply the acceleration for two or so rounds and then pair the field normally from there. Is this right Kevin?

  9. #9
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,353
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    I am curious about Kevin's comments about acceleration and how it actually is supposed to work and sp's defects in this department.

    I had thought you apply the acceleration for two or so rounds and then pair the field normally from there. Is this right Kevin?
    There is probably a larger and even older thread about this (and no, not the one linked to above ) somewhere.

    What SP does is simply add points to the designated players for the purposes of pairing them for as many rounds as specified. Sometimes this leads to bottom-half players who have had an upset and a lucky draw playing on top board.

    A correct accelerated system, however, involves pairing together top half players with perfect scores, and feeding bottom half players with perfect scores to top half players with less than perfect scores (but not too much less) until either no bottom half players are on perfect scores or the tournament is nearly finished.

    Rather than decide in advance to accelerate for exactly two rounds, the controller should decide to accelerate for at least two rounds, taking the acceleration off once all the bottom half players have dropped points, or when there are only a couple of rounds left (by which stage any bottom half player still on 100% deserves to be playing on top board).

    The correct system does a much better job of keeping mismatches off the very top boards, which is important if your aim is to ensure that the winner(s) are worthy.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  10. #10
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,308

    Round 1 accelerated pairings from wtm

    Assumes wins for all higher seeds, draws only for players within 100 points of each other (this is just a test/example).

    Code:
    Bd	#	Res	White Player Name	#	Res	Black Player Name	
    1	14	0	Andrew S Barker  (0.0)	  1	1	Stephen J Solomon  (1.0)
    2	2	1	Michael Cashman  (1.0)	  15	0	Shayne Hunter  (0.0)
    3	16	0	Michael Gearing  (0.0)	  3	1	Tony Weller  (1.0)
    4	4	1	Brian Thomas  (1.0)	  17	0	Gene Nakauchi  (0.0)
    5	18	0	John C Ager  (0.0)	  5	1	John Alkin  (1.0)
    6	6	1	Alexandra Jule  (1.0)	  19	0	Matthew Gilpin  (0.0)
    7	20	0	Brock Mcintyre  (0.0)	  7	1	Oleg Korenevski  (1.0)
    8	8	1	Mark C Stokes  (1.0)	  21	0	Sean S. Erickson  (0.0)
    9	22	0	Peter Booy  (0.0)	  9	1	Antolin Feria  (1.0)
    10	10	1	Keith Macleod  (1.0)	  23	0	Garvin Gray  (0.0)
    11	24	0	John Boni  (0.0)	  11	1	Gerard Akers  (1.0)
    12	12	1	Andrea Altoff  (1.0)	  25	0	Peter G Bender  (0.0)
    13	26	0	Yi Lui  (0.0)	  13	1	Craig A Stewart  (1.0)
    14	27	1	Norm Braybrooke  (1.0)	  40	0	Jim Rogers  (0.0)
    15	41	0	Alex Miles  (0.0)	  28	1	Michael D'Arcy  (1.0)
    16	29	1	Kevin Bourke  (1.0)	  42	0	Kenji Nakauchi  (0.0)
    17	44	0	Curtis Teed  (0.0)	  30	1	Finn Sorenson  (1.0)
    18	31	1	Sebastian Jule  (1.0)	  45	0	Rachael Solomon  (0.0)
    19	46	0	Jack Shanks  (0.0)	  32	1	Kieton Beilby  (1.0)
    20	33	1	Andrew Webster  (1.0)	  47	0	Peter Seeto  (0.0)
    21	48	0	Alexander Seeto  (0.0)	  34	1	Beng Goh  (1.0)
    22	36	1	Allan Menham  (1.0)	  49	0	Andrew Morrison  (0.0)
    23	50	0	Aidan Leask  (0.0)	  37	1	Jily Goh  (1.0)
    24	38	1	Matthew Lloyd  (1.0)	  51	0	Jean-Paul Guilbaud  (0.0)
    25	52	0	Tetias Goh  (0.0)	  39	1	Anthony Solomon  (1.0)
    26	35		Lachlan van den Bergh  (0.5)	  BYE
    	43	1	Matthew L Hopkins  (1.0)	  		BYE
    

  11. #11
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,308

    Round 2

    Code:
    Bd	#	Res	White Player Name	#	Res	Black Player Name	
    1	1	1	Stephen J Solomon  (2.0)  8	0	Mark C Stokes  (1.0)
    2	7	0	Oleg Korenevski  (1.0)	  2	1	Michael Cashman  (2.0)
    3	3	1	Tony Weller  (2.0)	  10	0	Keith Macleod  (1.0)
    4	9	0	Antolin Feria  (1.0)	  4	1	Brian Thomas  (2.0)
    5	5	1	John Alkin  (2.0)	  12	0	Andrea Altoff  (1.0)
    6	11	0	Gerard Akers  (1.0)	  6	1	Alexandra Jule  (2.0)
    7	13		Craig A Stewart  (1.5)	  14		Andrew S Barker  (0.5)
    8	15	1	Shayne Hunter  (1.0)	  27	0	Norm Braybrooke  (1.0)
    9	28	0	Michael D'Arcy  (1.0)	  16	1	Michael Gearing  (1.0)
    10	17	1	Gene Nakauchi  (1.0)	  29	0	Kevin Bourke  (1.0)
    11	30	0	Finn Sorenson  (1.0)	  18	1	John C Ager  (1.0)
    12	19	1	Matthew Gilpin  (1.0)	  31	0	Sebastian Jule  (1.0)
    13	32	0	Kieton Beilby  (1.0)	  20	1	Brock Mcintyre  (1.0)
    14	21	1	Sean S. Erickson  (1.0)	  33	0	Andrew Webster  (1.0)
    15	34	0	Beng Goh  (1.0)	  	  22	1	Peter Booy  (1.0)
    16	23	1	Garvin Gray  (1.0)	  36	0	Allan Menham  (1.0)
    17	37	0	Jily Goh  (1.0)	  	  24	1	John Boni  (1.0)
    18	25	1	Peter G Bender  (1.0)	  38	0	Matthew Lloyd  (1.0)
    19	39	0	Anthony Solomon  (1.0)	  26	1	Yi Lui  (1.0)
    20	35	1	Lachlan van den Bergh(1.5) 43	0	Matthew L Hopkins  (1.0)
    21	40	1	Jim Rogers  (1.0)	  48	0	Alexander Seeto  (0.0)
    22	47	0	Peter Seeto  (0.0)	  41	1	Alex Miles  (1.0)
    23	42	1	Kenji Nakauchi  (1.0)	  50	0	Aidan Leask  (0.0)
    24	49	1	Andrew Morrison  (1.0)	  44	0	Curtis Teed  (0.0)
    25	45	0	Rachael Solomon  (0.0)	  52	1	Tetias Goh  (1.0)
    26	51	0	Jean-Paul Guilbaud  (0.0) 46	1	Jack Shanks  (1.0)
    

  12. #12
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,308

    Round 3

    Code:
    Bd	#	Res	White Player Name	#	Res	Black Player Name	
    1	4	___	Brian Thomas  (2.0)	  1	___	Stephen J Solomon  (2.0)
    2	2	___	Michael Cashman  (2.0)	  5	___	John Alkin  (2.0)
    3	6	___	Alexandra Jule  (2.0)	  3	___	Tony Weller  (2.0)
    4	13	___	Craig A Stewart  (1.5)	  35	___	Lachlan van den Bergh  (1.5)
    5	27	___	Norm Braybrooke  (1.0)	  7	___	Oleg Korenevski  (1.0)
    6	8	___	Mark C Stokes  (1.0)	  28	___	Michael D'Arcy  (1.0)
    7	29	___	Kevin Bourke  (1.0)	  9	___	Antolin Feria  (1.0)
    8	10	___	Keith Macleod  (1.0)	  30	___	Finn Sorenson  (1.0)
    9	31	___	Sebastian Jule  (1.0)	  11	___	Gerard Akers  (1.0)
    10	12	___	Andrea Altoff  (1.0)	  32	___	Kieton Beilby  (1.0)
    11	33	___	Andrew Webster  (1.0)	  15	___	Shayne Hunter  (1.0)
    12	16	___	Michael Gearing  (1.0)	  34	___	Beng Goh  (1.0)
    13	36	___	Allan Menham  (1.0)	  17	___	Gene Nakauchi  (1.0)
    14	18	___	John C Ager  (1.0)	  37	___	Jily Goh  (1.0)
    15	38	___	Matthew Lloyd  (1.0)	  19	___	Matthew Gilpin  (1.0)
    16	20	___	Brock Mcintyre  (1.0)	  39	___	Anthony Solomon  (1.0)
    17	41	___	Alex Miles  (1.0)	  21	___	Sean S. Erickson  (1.0)
    18	22	___	Peter Booy  (1.0)	  40	___	Jim Rogers  (1.0)
    19	46	___	Jack Shanks  (1.0)	  23	___	Garvin Gray  (1.0)
    20	24	___	John Boni  (1.0)	  42	___	Kenji Nakauchi  (1.0)
    21	52	___	Tetias Goh  (1.0)	  25	___	Peter G Bender  (1.0)
    22	26	___	Yi Lui  (1.0)	  	  49	___	Andrew Morrison  (1.0)
    23	43	___	Matthew L Hopkins  (1.0)  14	___	Andrew S Barker  (0.5)
    24	44	___	Curtis Teed  (0.0)	  51	___	Jean-Paul Guilbaud  (0.0)
    25	48	___	Alexander Seeto  (0.0)	  45	___	Rachael Solomon  (0.0)
    26	50	___	Aidan Leask  (0.0)	  47	___	Peter Seeto  (0.0)
    

  13. #13
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,308
    Ok in round 3, is board four correct. Acceleration was applied to round 3

  14. #14
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,353
    Quote Originally Posted by ggrayggray
    Ok in round 3, is board four correct. Acceleration was applied to round 3
    The rules in Reuben's book (first edn) for round 3 are as follows:

    Pair together all top half players having 2 points.

    Done

    Pair all bottom half players with 2 points against top half with either 1.5 or 1 point

    Not applicable

    Pair together all remaining top half players with 1.5 points

    Only one to pair.

    Pair bottom half players on 1.5 points with top half players on 1 point and, if necessary, 0.5 point

    Here we have a problem because instead of doing this the bottom half player on 1.5 has been paired with a top-halfer on 1.5.

    (Next comes Pair together all remaining players)

    I am not sure if there's an established convention regarding what to do in this situation but it is definitely more in the spirit of the system to pair the bottom-half player on 1.5 with a top-halfer on 1, and the top-halfer on 1.5 with a top-halfer on 1 as well. Not only does this provide better weeding out of the top end of the field but it also eliminates a mismatch.

    Therefore I think board 4 is probably not the ideal pairing. I'm reluctant to say it's "wrong" in case there's some accepted acceleration system that leads to it for some reason.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. How competitive do you want it to be?
    By ursogr8 in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 738
    Last Post: 17-06-2011, 10:46 PM
  2. Rookendgames
    By Pillsbury in forum Chess Training
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 20-05-2005, 12:05 PM
  3. 2004/2005 Lidums Australian Open
    By Garvinator in forum Mt Buller Chess
    Replies: 259
    Last Post: 04-02-2005, 09:24 PM
  4. Round 4 Results, Round 5 Draw
    By adelaideuni in forum Completed Tournaments
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-01-2004, 09:19 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •