GP Swiss Teams Vs Round Robin
Our congress traditionally has 7 X 7 format, but this year we seem to be a bit down (we can but hope as there is 2+ weeks to go). We have 12 teams entered.
At what point should we start switching from a Swiss (not necessarily 7 rounds: 6 rounds of 8 is close but the GPs start dropping on a 5 rounds of 9 (10?)) to a Round Robin?
Comments
In Surrey we have never got above 13 teams for our Green Point weekend since Covid.
We advertise it as multiple teams i.e. all play all, otherwise over Swissing is a problem.
I think that probably 15 teams is the minimum for a 7 round Swiss, but I’m sure Robin can let us have the official view.
The regulars who attend each year seem to enjoy the format so we have no plans to change it at present.
The figure I have in my head is about a third as a minimum. I think that's for swiss pairs. The white book actually discusses the exact examplle of 7 rounds and 12 teams, and recommends either allowing rematches in the last 3 rounds or if there's a gap of 3 or more rounds.
It's always made sense to me to allow rematches in later rounds. But might not be a preferred option. According to the white book, longer matches and fewer rounds tends to be unpopular, although the Northern midweek congress has done quite well with 6 * 8 the last few years.
True- although the GP isn't much different, players have fewer opportunities of winning some. They would much rather have seven chances than six.
If your 12-teams play a round-robin they will have 11 opportunities to win matches and hence points.
The GP for matches won are proportional to the number of boards (x 1/29)
The GP on offer is proportional to the number of boards in the event,
I was under the impression (Master points handbook section 6) that GPs were based on ToE (number of tables), not number of boards. The only requirement being at least 36 boards.
Am I missing something?
Awards for matches won are based on the length of the match.
Bonus ranking awards are on a sliding scale to a proportion of the field, with the top award based on the size of the field.
So the number of boards played has no effect on the "overall ranking" elements of the GP awards, but it does on the "awards for matches won"?
Meaning that for an event like all play all pairs, the number of GPs is determined solely by the field size?
That doesn't seem right.
No, the number of boards in each match determines the awards for matches won, as it should.
The number of GPs available is determined by the number of (GPS/ round) X number of rounds. As Robin says - the number of GPs per round = / 29 so for 7 board rounds is is 7/29 (0.241...) which is rounded up to 0.25. The field does not matter save if the size affects the number of rounds or number of boards/ round.
In addition to the default award/ match the top pairs/ teams get an extra bonus: this DOES depend on the field size - the larger the field the more competitors get these bonus awards- but it is always a very small percentage of the total. It would seem fair that those who do best in a large field get more GPs than if they play in a smaller field.
I get that.
My point is that the overall number of boards will affect the GPs earned, since more boards means more matches.
As you would expect, for a given overall number of boards, the total number of GPs awarded is largely independent of the number of boards per match (6 rounds of 8 gets 67.2 GPs, 8 rounds of 6 gets 64 GPs).
But in all-play-all, there is no per match award (as there are no matches).
My (brief and approxmate) calculations show the "per match" award element equates to around 90% of the total GPs awarded.
Assuming I'm right, all-play-all events only generate a tenth of a similar sized (tables, number of boards) Swiss event.
That's what doesn't seem right.
Have I gone wrong somewhere?
I'm afraid I can't make much sense of this. More boards does not necessarily mean more matches. 7x7 is one more board than 8x6 but it has fewer matches. Winning every match in 8x6 gives exactly the same number of master points as 6x8. All-play-all has match awards if the matches are sufficiently long - at least 6 boards.
If there are awards per match won, then the bonus ranking awards are on a different scale.
That I didn't know.
Where's that in the Masterpoints handbook?
Yet in Swiss there are per match awards go down to 2 board matches. Interesting.
From the Master Points and Licensing Handbook:
4.5 EVENTS ATTRACTING AN AWARD PER MATCH WON – GENERAL PRINCIPLES
4.5.1 The most common events of this type are teams events (multiple teams, Swiss teams, round- robins and knock-out) and Swiss pairs events. However, the general principle is that all stages of events of 36+ boards duration, where competitors meet for a minimum of 6 consecutive boards, shall attract an award per winning match. Additionally, any teams event of at least 36 boards duration shall attract an award per match won even if matches (rounds) are of fewer than 6 boards each.
4.5.2 In knock-out events, the award per winning match increases as the competition progresses. In other types of contest (Swiss, leagues etc) the award per winning match is constant, but there is an additional ‘bonus award’ given to the leading competitors based upon the final ranking list. The event (or stage of event) must be of at least 36 boards total duration, and matches must be of at least 6 boards each in a pairs or individual event (otherwise, it is a basic event only, as described in 4.1). By contrast, there is no lower limit in a teams event, provided that the event itself is of at least 36 boards duration.
I don't think I've ever encountered a Swiss event of 36 boards or more with 2-board matches.
Thanks, Gordon
It does seem a little ridiculous!