Future Grading Systems

[David Sedgwick]

I think you were looking too narrow, if you look at the last five boards then all of them had played each other in round 1, presumably the computer program did the best possible pairing and unfortunately you would get at least one strange pairing if you also consider colours

Round 2 pairings for players with ½/1 are notoriously tricky. You always find yourself wanting to pair again, with opposite colours, the players who played each other in Round 1.

All the same, you have to make a better job of it than Swiss Manager did. I haven't yet worked out the correct pairings, but they're not the actual ones.

[Sean Hewitt]

All the same, you have to make a better job of it than Swiss Manager did. I haven't yet worked out the correct pairings, but they're not the actual ones.

I have worked out the correct pairings (though don't have them with me). As David says, the ones played were not correct though.

[Alex McFarlane]

I have played around with SwissManager but found it much more unfriendly than SwissMaster to set up and really annoying to alter pairings. I was planning on contacting Sean about how he found it as he is familiar with SwissMaster too.

Neither program seems to do what it says on the tin. SwissMaster is not too bad but will downfloat two players from a scoregroup rather than change the float into the group.

[Sean Hewitt]

SwissMaster is not too bad but will downfloat two players from a scoregroup rather than change the float into the group.

I'm glad it does this as this seems the correct thing to do according to the FIDE Swiss pairing rules.

As I understand it, you change the downfloater if and only if that player the player downfloated cannot be paired in his new scoregroup and would therefore be required to downfloat a second time into the next scoregroup.

[IM Jack Rudd]

SwissMaster is not too bad but will downfloat two players from a scoregroup rather than change the float into the group.

I'm glad it does this as this seems the correct thing to do according to the FIDE Swiss pairing rules.

Ah, another bug in the pairing rules then.

[Alex Holowczak]

They are allowed to stand as the tournament regulations say that the pairings to be used are those produced by SwissManager.

Is there a reason that the regulations say this other than the size of the tournament? I.e. is it the norm in such events to use what the computer says, regardless of what the correct pairings are?

[Sean Hewitt]

They are allowed to stand as the tournament regulations say that the pairings to be used are those produced by SwissManager.

Is there a reason that the regulations say this other than the size of the tournament? I.e. is it the norm in such events to use what the computer says, regardless of what the correct pairings are?

I believe it's pretty common.

e2e4 T's and C's say

Pairing will be done in accordance with the FIDE swiss pairing rules using the Swiss Master pairing program. Published pairings will not be changed unless
(i) They are in breach of one of the absolute pairing rules specified by FIDE
(ii) They are based on incorrect results from previous rounds
If either (i) or (ii) applies the controller will only change the published pairings if s/he decides it is in the best interests of the event.

If you did anything else it seems to me that you might as well do the pairings manually because you effectively have to do that to check the computer pairings!

[IM Jack Rudd]

A set of pairings was, incidentally, amended at the last e2e4 event under rule (ii).

[Alex McFarlane]

SwissMaster is not too bad but will downfloat two players from a scoregroup rather than change the float into the group.

I'm glad it does this as this seems the correct thing to do according to the FIDE Swiss pairing rules.

Ah, another bug in the pairing rules then.

I disagree Sean. Downfloating two players needlessly breaks rule B3

B.3
The difference of the scores of two players paired against each other should be as small as possible and ideally zero.

I believe this to have a higher priority than anything in C - Pairing procedures.

[Sean Hewitt]

SwissMaster is not too bad but will downfloat two players from a scoregroup rather than change the float into the group.

I'm glad it does this as this seems the correct thing to do according to the FIDE Swiss pairing rules.

I disagree Sean. Downfloating two players needlessly breaks rule B3

B.3
The difference of the scores of two players paired against each other should be as small as possible and ideally zero.

I believe this to have a higher priority than anything in C - Pairing procedures.

The answer to this is that the pairing criteria (B) do not match up with pairing procedures (C). The procedures (C) are supposed to deliver the aims of the pairing criteria (B) but they do not! However, there is nothing in the rules that says that you ignore the laid down pairing procedures. I've brought this discrepancy to the attention of a member of the swiss pairing committee and we'll see what they say.

[Roger de Coverly]

All the same, you have to make a better job of it than Swiss Manager did. I haven't yet worked out the correct pairings, but they're not the actual ones.

Do the pairing rules make any statement about where you start? I think I see how the Aix round 2 pairings were arrived at. It's as you would expect, top half v bottom half. The trouble seems to have arisen, that if you work from the top down, that by the time you reach the last few pairings, you run out of sensible options because the most natural pairings involve players who have already played. I've noticed that arbiters using pairing cards sometimes work from the ends towards the middle. Would that have worked for Aix?