PDA

View Full Version : Vega Chess New Zealand edition



Keong Ang
20-09-2012, 08:29 PM
The New Zealand Chess Federation Inc. has purchased Vega
http://www.vegachess.com
for New Zealand wide use in all chess tournaments.

You are encouraged to use Vega as chess tournament software for all
tournaments. This includes unrated small school/fun tournaments right
through to the highest level Grandmaster tournaments that need to comply
with FIDE regulations.

NZCF has licensed Vega so that everyone is allowed to use it within New
Zealand. There are no other charges for using Vega.

Current latest version is Vega 6.4
Download latest version of Vega and manual from
http://www.vegachess.com/tl/index.php/downloaden.html

Print out the 70 page manual and read it to avoid common problems.

In order to unlock Vega you need the New Zealand registration file, regcode.txt
Save regcode.txt file into the same folder that Vega6.4 (or later) is installed
in.
You can download this file from http://www.newzealandchess.co.nz/

Some NZCF specific things:
There is only one field for player name. In order for player names to be
submitted correctly for NZCF ratings, please enter name in "<surname>,
<given names>" format.
It is important that the surname is the leftmost word and immediately
followed by a comma(,).
The easiest way to enter players is by loading them from the NZCF
alphabetical rating list that is provided in Vega format. These lists
(standard and rapid) are available for download from
http://www.newzealandchess.co.nz/
look for the links to the .csv files under "Lists in Vega-friendly
format:"

You should also load the latest FIDE rating list into Vega and then
update player FIDE ratings automatically. Player's FIDE IDs are already
entered from the NZCF ratings list and these would be used to update
their FIDE ratings.
Please refer to the Vega manual for more details of such database
operations.

While Vega can generate the NZCF ratings report for submission under the
"Rating Report", you should send the entire contents of the Vega
tournament folder for ratings. This way, any errors can be easily
corrected by the ratings officer.
Similarly, all FIDE tournament reports, and player norm certificates can
be produced by Vega. You should also send the entire Vega tournament
folder for FIDE rating submissions.

Note that you can still continue using all previously NZCF approved
software (eg. Swiss Perfect) for NZCF rated tournaments.

FIDE rated tournaments with computerised swiss pairings must use Vega as
tournament software.
When using Vega for computerised swiss pairings, you must use Dubov
swiss pairings as that is the only one currently endorsed by FIDE. FIDE
has just approved Vega for the more familiar Dutch swiss pairings using
JaVaFo but has not yet officially endorsed it. Expect endorsement in
early 2013.

A New Zealand Vega manual covering NZ specific settings or subjects is
currently being compiled. When available, it would need to be read in
conjunction with the Vega manual.

It is highly recommended that you try out Vega to get familiar with it
before running a critical tournament.

Feel free to ask me any questions. These questions would help make the
NZ Vega manual more useful and relevant.


FA Keong Ang (FIDE ID: 4303660)
Secretary,
New Zealand Chess Federation.

first25plus5
21-09-2012, 11:24 AM
Thanks Keong. I assume using the Dubov setting means one can still choose to use the Danuabian variant of this and/or the WWW/BBB box or choose not to.

Bill Gletsos
21-09-2012, 12:30 PM
FIDE rated tournaments with computerised swiss pairings must use Vega as
tournament software.Obviously a decision by the NZCF as there is no such FIDE requirement that FIDE rated tournaments use FIDE approved programs in the FIDE handbook.

When using Vega for computerised swiss pairings, you must use Dubov
swiss pairings as that is the only one currently endorsed by FIDE. FIDE
has just approved Vega for the more familiar Dutch swiss pairings using
JaVaFo but has not yet officially endorsed it. Expect endorsement in
early 2013.Again obviously a decision by the NZCF as there is no such FIDE requirement that FIDE rated tournaments use FIDE approved programs in the FIDE handbook.

jhughes
21-09-2012, 02:10 PM
Obviously a decision by the NZCF as there is no such FIDE requirement that FIDE rated tournaments use FIDE approved programs in the FIDE handbook.
Again obviously a decision by the NZCF as there is no such FIDE requirement that FIDE rated tournaments use FIDE approved programs in the FIDE handbook.
Who cares if its NZCF's decision? Vega gives better pairings than SP, and it's nice to see them using a superior software - I can only hope that the ACF legislates similar requirements soon enough.
Congratulations to NZCF!

Keong Ang
21-09-2012, 02:56 PM
Thanks Keong. I assume using the Dubov setting means one can still choose to use the Danuabian variant of this and/or the WWW/BBB box or choose not to.

When using Dubov pairings in a FIDE rated tournament, do NOT check "Accept WWW/BBB"
Doing so would break FIDE rules and is prohibited in a FIDE rated tournament.

You should use the Danubian Variant for Dubov since that has already come into effect however you can still use the older Dubov version since FIDE has still not updated their handbook. Happily the older Dubov is the default setting since that would automatically let pairings be done according to the FIDE Handbook as published.

While Vega has lots of flexibility, most of the pairing options cannot be used in a FIDE rated tournament since that would break the rules!
All this additional options/settings makes Vega very flexible and practical to use since most tournaments in NZ are not FIDE rated and need to meet all sorts of needs. eg. you may want to avoid pairing people who come to your club specifically to play with other people (they are tired of playing each other).

Keong Ang
21-09-2012, 03:41 PM
Obviously a decision by the NZCF as there is no such FIDE requirement that FIDE rated tournaments use FIDE approved programs in the FIDE handbook.
Again obviously a decision by the NZCF as there is no such FIDE requirement that FIDE rated tournaments use FIDE approved programs in the FIDE handbook.
Thankfully FIDE recommends the use of endorsed programs instead of making their use compulsory.
I doubt there would be any FIDE rated tournament in NZ that FIDE would reject simply because non-endorsed programs were used.

It is a different situation when a FIDE rated tournament produces player norms. Norm opportunities are few and hard to come by in NZ. The NZCF is not going to risk hard won norms becoming invalid because the pairings that produced it were incorrect.
Additionally, when the NZCF has to go through considerable cost (that will ultimately be borne by the chess community) to license arbiters next year just to comply with FIDE requirements, we are not going to jeopardise these licenses through tournaments that are incorrectly paired by an unendorsed program. Much simpler and prudent to simply make the use of Vega compulsory whenever a tournament involves FIDE.

The NZCF made Vega available to use in any NZ chess tournament FREE of charge. Every chess tournament at every level in NZ is now able to have the best up-to-date software.

Keong Ang
21-09-2012, 04:04 PM
Who cares if its NZCF's decision? Vega gives better pairings than SP, and it's nice to see them using a superior software - I can only hope that the ACF legislates similar requirements soon enough.
Congratulations to NZCF!
Thanks for this.

Vega's pairings are correct, as long as you think FIDE's swiss pairing rules are correct. They are certainly more correct than SP's.

Vega is only required for FIDE rated tournaments and above. Even then, there is the option of using some other FIDE endorsed software.
Note that this requirement only applies to computerised swiss pairings.
Round Robins, manual swiss pairings (with pairing cards) do not need to use Vega.

I'm sure the ACF would make decisions that are suited to Australia. The NZCF has more than enough to do here in NZ.

Kevin Bonham
21-09-2012, 04:11 PM
It is a different situation when a FIDE rated tournament produces player norms. Norm opportunities are few and hard to come by in NZ. The NZCF is not going to risk hard won norms becoming invalid because the pairings that produced it were incorrect.

I'm not aware of anything that requires that incorrect pairings invalidate a player title norm. Indeed there are frequently pairing differences between the approved pairing programs - often meaning that one or both is getting it wrong - and these do not invalidate norms. There is some possibility for the use of a bad pairing system to invalidate a norm but only in extreme circumstances (eg the system was very unfair or grossly violated the requirements of the Tournament Rules).


Additionally, when the NZCF has to go through considerable cost (that will ultimately be borne by the chess community) to license arbiters next year just to comply with FIDE requirements, we are not going to jeopardise these licenses through tournaments that are incorrectly paired by an unendorsed program.

The licence system exists primarily as a cash-cow for FIDE and secondarily to encourage arbiters to remain active. There has been no provision for the removal of licences on the basis of micro-managing performance within the scheme.

I think what you are doing with Vega sounds good and I am hoping to see the ACF move to solutions that dispense with Swiss Perfect entirely in the near future given its obsolescence as a pairings program. But some of your concerns are wildly exaggerated if not completely unfounded.

jhughes
21-09-2012, 04:30 PM
Thanks for this.

Vega's pairings are correct, as long as you think FIDE's swiss pairing rules are correct. They are certainly more correct than SP's.

Vega is only required for FIDE rated tournaments and above. Even then, there is the option of using some other FIDE endorsed software.
Note that this requirement only applies to computerised swiss pairings.
Round Robins, manual swiss pairings (with pairing cards) do not need to use Vega.

I'm sure the ACF would make decisions that are suited to Australia. The NZCF has more than enough to do here in NZ.
Using out of date, unapproved programs is NOT suited to Australia .

Bill Gletsos
21-09-2012, 04:41 PM
Who cares if its NZCF's decision?Because his statement could have been interpreted by the clueless as a FIDE requirement.

Bill Gletsos
21-09-2012, 04:44 PM
It is a different situation when a FIDE rated tournament produces player norms. Norm opportunities are few and hard to come by in NZ. The NZCF is not going to risk hard won norms becoming invalid because the pairings that produced it were incorrect.There is no FIDE requirement in the FIDE handbook that FIDE title tournaments (norm events) use FIDE approved programs.

Denis_Jessop
21-09-2012, 05:06 PM
Is there a reason why the NZCF preferred Vega to Swiss Master and Swiss Manager?

Likewise does the NZCF really propose to use the Dubov system rather than the Dutch System for pairings and, if so, why?

DJ

jhughes
21-09-2012, 07:08 PM
Is there a reason why the NZCF preferred Vega to Swiss Master and Swiss Manager?

Likewise does the NZCF really propose to use the Dubov system rather than the Dutch System for pairings and, if so, why?

DJ
Vega is easy to use and cheaper than either of them - SM is an absolute nightmare in usability.

Keong Ang
21-09-2012, 09:25 PM
Because his statement could have been interpreted by the clueless as a FIDE requirement.

Only an absolutely clueless dummy would take one statement out of the whole announcement and interpret it totally out of context.
Wonder why you need to be concerned about the clueless. They do not run chess tournaments and so the announcement does not apply to them.

Keong Ang
21-09-2012, 09:46 PM
Is there a reason why the NZCF preferred Vega to Swiss Master and Swiss Manager?

Likewise does the NZCF really propose to use the Dubov system rather than the Dutch System for pairings and, if so, why?

DJ

Why did the NZCF prefer Vega?
Vega is easy to use and very efficient.
A novice would find it even easier than Swiss Perfect.

It is really scalable too. Ideally suited to running kid chess tournaments at rural schools right up to tournaments of the highest level.

Actually Vega has already been FIDE endorsed for Dutch swiss pairings during the Istanbul FIDE Congress. We're just waiting for the FIDE Handbook to be updated.
This makes Vega the only program to be FIDE endorsed for multiple swiss systems.
Vega produces correct (according to FIDE) pairings under both Dubov and Dutch systems (using JaVaFo).
This is a very big improvement over Swiss Perfect's wrong Dutch pairings.
The icing on the cake is Vega handling half point bye's (eg. for players taking time off sightseeing) nicely.

The NZCF allows use of any official FIDE swiss systems.

Keong Ang
21-09-2012, 10:03 PM
There is no FIDE requirement in the FIDE handbook that FIDE title tournaments (norm events) use FIDE approved programs.
Of course.
However it is a requirement that pairings are not modified to allow a player to achieve title requirements.
Pairings must comply with the rules of the swiss system used.
Using a FIDE endorsed program ensures compliance that FIDE cannot dispute.

Not using a FIDE endorsed program requires the arbiter to be responsible and accountable for correct pairings. It is simply much easier to just use FIDE endorsed programs. Especially when there is a program as affordable and easy to use as Vega.

Kevin Bonham
21-09-2012, 10:22 PM
However it is a requirement that pairings are not modified to allow a player to achieve title requirements.

This is true but there is a simple solution. Don't modify pairings produced by a program or method to allow a player to meet title requirements. It has nothing to do with the initial choice of program.

And note that if a program produces a wrong pairing that the director modifies because it is wrong, that is not the same thing as modifying to allow a player to meet title requirements - not even if it enables that to happen as well.

That requirement refers to the once-common practice of deliberately fiddling pairings that were generated by a program (or by hand) in order to help a player try to get a title. That problem could occur just as easily with a FIDE approved program as without, as a result of manual override.

So again the example is irrelevant.

Keong Ang
21-09-2012, 10:40 PM
I'm not aware of anything that requires that incorrect pairings invalidate a player title norm. Indeed there are frequently pairing differences between the approved pairing programs - often meaning that one or both is getting it wrong - and these do not invalidate norms. There is some possibility for the use of a bad pairing system to invalidate a norm but only in extreme circumstances (eg the system was very unfair or grossly violated the requirements of the Tournament Rules).
It does not benefit FIDE to not grant a title since awarding titles generates revenue for FIDE.
However, title applications need to be published and the reason why it goes through this process is to allow for public scrutiny. Why provide an avenue for dispute when it is so easily shut by ensuring pairings are done by a FIDE endorsed program like Vega?

Swiss Perfect's tendency to pair by incorrectly prioritising colour over score creates a situation where an accusation that a norm was gained through pairings that "maximised opportunities" is legitimate. Why take the risk when there's an easy way to remove it?


The licence system exists primarily as a cash-cow for FIDE and secondarily to encourage arbiters to remain active. There has been no provision for the removal of licences on the basis of micro-managing performance within the scheme.
The same disciplinary provisions already exist. Arbiters have been stripped of their titles in the past. They can just as easily be stripped of their licenses in future.
We may think licensing is a cash-cow but it has been actively touted by the Arbiters Commission as a way to uphold standards and ensure arbiters stay up to date. Since only licensed arbiters can run FIDE rated tournaments, it now is effectively a disciplinary enforcement mechanism. In the past arbiters were stripped of their titles, but could still be arbiters in FIDE rated tournaments. Now, you need a license to be the arbiter in a FIDE rated tournament.


I think what you are doing with Vega sounds good and I am hoping to see the ACF move to solutions that dispense with Swiss Perfect entirely in the near future given its obsolescence as a pairings program. But some of your concerns are wildly exaggerated if not completely unfounded.
We licensed Vega for NZ wide use after more than a year of testing in all sorts of situations. Swiss Perfect's increasing obsolescence was the prime motivator. FIDE endorsement was a qualifying criteria before a program was considered for selection. In a way, Vega's FIDE endorsement made concerns about compliance with FIDE requirements go away. Instead of having to continually check the FIDE Handbook to see if something was compulsory, we could simply not bother since Vega would have already complied anyway.
i.e. instead of continually saying "we don't need to do that" and than keep checking the handbook, we now simply say "we already do that".

Keong Ang
21-09-2012, 10:56 PM
This is true but there is a simple solution. Don't modify pairings produced by a program or method to allow a player to meet title requirements. It has nothing to do with the initial choice of program.

And note that if a program produces a wrong pairing that the director modifies because it is wrong, that is not the same thing as modifying to allow a player to meet title requirements - not even if it enables that to happen as well.

That requirement refers to the once-common practice of deliberately fiddling pairings that were generated by a program (or by hand) in order to help a player try to get a title. That problem could occur just as easily with a FIDE approved program as without, as a result of manual override.

So again the example is irrelevant.
Didn't FIDE already instruct arbiters to not modify pairings produced by FIDE endorsed programs?

Essentially pairings that are produced by FIDE endorsed programs are correct because these programs "are endorsed by FIDE after a successful endorsement procedure".
Saying the pairings are wrong is equivalent to saying the endorsement procedure and FIDE's recommendation is wrong. Personally I think this is a load a baloney but I do also know that no arbiter can be reprimanded for accepting a FIDE endorsed programs pairings as correct.

Anyway, I think this discussion is very irrelevant to the thread which should really be focused on getting Vega implemented in NZ.
I'm really soliciting feedback on user problems or issues for a NZ Vega manual. (I'm not writing a NZ Arbiter's FIDE compliance manual!!) :eek: :eek:

Kevin Bonham
21-09-2012, 11:10 PM
However, title applications need to be published and the reason why it goes through this process is to allow for public scrutiny.

Indeed but that public scrutiny isn't there to encourage people to nitpick over things that aren't actually prohibited by the rules. As you say it is not in FIDE's interests to reject a valid application. Rather, public scrutiny helps catch things like factual errors (deliberate or otherwise) in applications and signature fraud. Indeed, there was a case at the Congress in which an official from Russia addressed the meeting to assert that an application had been fradulently submitted as officially authorised when it was not.


Swiss Perfect's tendency to pair by incorrectly prioritising colour over score creates a situation where an accusation that a norm was gained through pairings that "maximised opportunities" is legitimate.

But that is not the same thing as a situation where an accusation that a norm was gained through the altering of pairings to maximise opportunities is legitimate. Indeed SP pairings have plenty of potential to cause a player to miss norm opportunities, eg by avoidably downfloating them to an opponent too weak.


Why take the risk when there's an easy way to remove it?

Why remove a risk when it doesn't really exist? As it is, it seems you'll cause confusion by telling people this new program is available, but then for a brief period only encouraging its use for Dubov.


The same disciplinary provisions already exist. Arbiters have been stripped of their titles in the past.

Who and for what? I expect it would have been for blatant fabrication or corruption only, not for innocent error, let alone non-error.

Kevin Bonham
21-09-2012, 11:20 PM
Didn't FIDE already instruct arbiters to not modify pairings produced by FIDE endorsed programs?

Such instructions won't necessarily stop people doing it. That is why it is clear in the title regulations that fiddling to give people suitable opponents is not permitted.


Essentially pairings that are produced by FIDE endorsed programs are correct because these programs "are endorsed by FIDE after a successful endorsement procedure".
Saying the pairings are wrong is equivalent to saying the endorsement procedure and FIDE's recommendation is wrong.

Not true. In endorsing a program FIDE doesn't necessarily warrant that it is absolutely perfect, only that its standard is high enough to be endorsed after rigorous testing. No practical amount of testing would catch every possible case in which a program might make an error. In my view the endorsement procedure is very thorough and the fact that some endorsed programs do still get it wrong in rare cases is no argument against it.


Personally I think this is a load a baloney

Your sentence "Saying the pairings ... wrong." was certainly a load of baloney. :hand:


Anyway, I think this discussion is very irrelevant to the thread which should really be focused on getting Vega implemented in NZ.

If you keep making dubious/false claims people are going to keep disputing them.

I'd be happy to split all the debate involving you, me and Bill after your initial reply to Bill to a new thread in Arbiters Corner if the irrelevant discussion was a bother to you.

Keong Ang
21-09-2012, 11:46 PM
Why remove a risk when it doesn't really exist? As it is, it seems you'll cause confusion by telling people this new program is available, but then for a brief period only encouraging its use for Dubov.
That's why it is easier to make it compulsory to use Vega for all FIDE rated swiss tournaments in New Zealand.
There's not many FIDE rated tournaments in NZ so there will be no confusion. We don't want to bother about compliance risk at all and with Vega it complies easily and makes it all a non-issue.

The announcement is very clear about what needs to be done when FIDE get's involved. Sure, there are always alternatives and options, but why confuse things. Keep it simple by having only one approved way.

What's so wrong with the Dubov system anyway?
During Vega's evaluation, short draws were practically eliminated whenever Dubov pairings were used. It tends to have the main contenders face each other in rounds when the results aren't clear. Makes short draws very risky for players. So they play with maximum effort.

Kevin Bonham
21-09-2012, 11:48 PM
What's so wrong with the Dubov system anyway?

Probably nothing except that players will not be familiar with it and may be confused when they get completely unexpected pairings.

Bill Gletsos
21-09-2012, 11:52 PM
Of course.
However it is a requirement that pairings are not modified to allow a player to achieve title requirements.True but it refers to arbiters manually modifying pairings to achieve title requirements.

Pairings must comply with the rules of the swiss system used.
Using a FIDE endorsed program ensures compliance that FIDE cannot dispute.This is simply your opinion.

Not using a FIDE endorsed program requires the arbiter to be responsible and accountable for correct pairings. It is simply much easier to just use FIDE endorsed programs. Especially when there is a program as affordable and easy to use as Vega.Approved programs have been known to get the pairings wrong.
Arbiters are responsible for correct parings even if using a FIDE approved program.

Keong Ang
22-09-2012, 12:05 AM
If you keep making dubious/false claims people are going to keep disputing them.

I'd be happy to split all the debate involving you, me and Bill after your initial reply to Bill to a new thread in Arbiters Corner if the irrelevant discussion was a bother to you.
Doesn't bother me. ;)
It had made this thread hot... and there's no such thing as bad publicity. :lol:

BTW, Bill's initial reply isn't a dispute, but stating an obvious fact for the clueless. ;)
It is an NZCF requirement where the NZCF has jurisdiction. Meaning all of New Zealand only.

I really did not expect a thread announcing the availability of Vega to be used in NZ free of charge to run this way.
But it is a pleasant surprise and you and Bill must to be thanked for helping get the NZCF's announcement get publicity. :D

Kevin Bonham
22-09-2012, 12:09 AM
But it is a pleasant surprise and you and Bill must to be thanked for helping get the NZCF's announcement get publicity. :D

I don't have any problem with unwittingly helping you in that way. I just think that false claims should be refuted lest they be taken seriously. Unfortunately your assumption that clueless people don't run tournaments is not always consistent with my experience.

Rhubarb
22-09-2012, 12:47 AM
Because his statement could have been interpreted by the clueless as a FIDE requirement.
Well maybe, but all the complete idiots have been banished to the other forum.

So what's wrong with Keong Ang's initial post?

All it is is an NZCF official posting on the NZ section of the site what the NZCF has decided that NZ organisers can and cannot do in relation to FIDE requirements.

It seems to me that the ACF should be happy to see what the NZCF is doing in these matters.

SHump
22-09-2012, 11:34 PM
I think it is great that Keong and the NZCF have done this. It brings something new into the use of pairing software - it does not have to be SP for all - and it is good to see some flexibility being practised by the ratings officer across the ditch! I have used vega a few times (when I was in NZ) and I and others found it easy to use, and now having the NZCF rating list compatible makes player entry easy as well.

And the talk about FIDE approved or not pairing software is also a no brainer - surely most arbiters once they see that vega is FIDE approved will use it, this approval just being one less thing to be concerned with (i.e. the pairings are not going to be a worry for most circumstances) when running an event. Does anyone want to say that SP is as good as vega?

Keong Ang
27-09-2012, 01:39 PM
When using Vega for computerised swiss pairings, you must use Dubov
swiss pairings as that is the only one currently endorsed by FIDE. FIDE
has just approved Vega for the more familiar Dutch swiss pairings using
JaVaFo but has not yet officially endorsed it. Expect endorsement in
early 2013.

FIDE has now published the decision made during Istanbul congress that Vega is now endorsed for Dutch swiss pairings when using JaVaFo engine.

All FIDE rated tournaments can now use Vega + JaVaFo for more familiar pairings. :D :cool:

http://www.fide.com/component/content/article/1-fide-news/6484-general-assembly-2012-decisions.html
http://www.fide.com/images/stories/NEWS_2012/Congress/GENERAL_ASSEMBLY_2012_DECISIONS.doc
http://www.fide.com/images/stories/NEWS_2012/Congress/Annex_71_-_SPP_Minutes2012.pdf

Bill Gletsos
11-10-2012, 11:50 AM
In order to unlock Vega you need the New Zealand registration file, regcode.txt
Save regcode.txt file into the same folder that Vega6.4 (or later) is installed
in.
You can download this file from http://www.newzealandchess.co.nz/
It would appear that the public posting of this file allows a fully functioning version of Vega to be illegally used by anyone worldwide.

forlano
13-10-2012, 05:31 AM
It would appear that the public posting of this file allows a fully functioning version of Vega to be illegally used by anyone worldwide.

Hello Bill,

yes, it may happen. However it was my suggestion to keep simple the procedure and save time.
I thought that the signature of "New Zealand" on all printed output should be enough to prevent its unauthorized usage by any FIDE titled arbiter that do not belong to NZCF.
In the meanwhile I continue to mantain the cost as low as possible to make a nonsense use it illegally and not to buy it stopping its development :) .

Regards,
Luigi

Craig_Hall
13-10-2012, 07:19 AM
I've been using Vega for the first time during the South Island Championships, with Swiss "Perfect" as a backup, and I have been impressed by Vega so far. There have been quite a few differences in the pairings produced so far, but interestingly, only in the bottom half of the field.

We even made the name cards, which was nice. Minor note - we couldn't figure out how to change the name of the tournament for the cards, so they say "V Festival Internazionale Riviera dei Cedri"... (the templates can be edited in Notepad, as I discovered later, but we'd already printed the cards by then)

forlano
13-10-2012, 06:11 PM
I've been using Vega for the first time during the South Island Championships, with Swiss "Perfect" as a backup, and I have been impressed by Vega so far. There have been quite a few differences in the pairings produced so far, but interestingly, only in the bottom half of the field.

We even made the name cards, which was nice. Minor note - we couldn't figure out how to change the name of the tournament for the cards, so they say "V Festival Internazionale Riviera dei Cedri"... (the templates can be edited in Notepad, as I discovered later, but we'd already printed the cards by then)

Hi Craig,

I do not know if this is the right place to answer. I'll add a FAQ in the user manual.
The cards are generated using a template file in qtf format in the folder badgetemplate. Those files can be changed and new cards can be created. Use the built in editor (icon [W] in the output page) to open it and save.

Regards,
Luigi

Craig_Hall
14-10-2012, 08:05 AM
Thanks for that! Having had more time to read the manual properly, it's explained in there, so I wouldn't worry about it.