Currently almost. Historically no.IM Jack Rudd wrote:The official rules for CAA pairings state that the top seed's round 1 colour is chosen randomly, which rather demolishes that argument.E Michael White wrote:My line of thinking was that under CAA pairings where a tournament has an odd number of boards, say 21 then the stronger player out of the two on each board in the first round is more likely to be white. In the case of 21 boards, 11 of the players will be white and likely stronger than their opps whereas only 10 black players could be stronger.
Estimating White's Advantage
-
- Posts: 1420
- Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 6:31 pm
Re: Estimating White's Advantage
-
- Posts: 8478
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm
Re: Estimating White's Advantage
I have looked at my own results from 2014/15 and found little of interest regarding colours. However, I also reviewed them as regards results against players of various ratings, which is another of Ian's interests.
Against players rated 160 plus, ranging up to 202, I scored +12 =8 -12. Against those in the range 120-159 I scored +7 =5 -9. This suggests that in my case at least, and 53 games is not a tiny sample, the whole exercise is pointless since the grading system has no predictive power whatsoever.
Against players rated 160 plus, ranging up to 202, I scored +12 =8 -12. Against those in the range 120-159 I scored +7 =5 -9. This suggests that in my case at least, and 53 games is not a tiny sample, the whole exercise is pointless since the grading system has no predictive power whatsoever.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.
-
- Posts: 3053
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am
Re: Estimating White's Advantage
Worth doing if you do it for a whole team though Those sorts of states would get you stuck on as a high a board as sanely legal.....
-
- Posts: 84
- Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 1:14 pm
- Location: Southend-on-Sea
Re: Estimating White's Advantage
Analysis of the ECF grading database reveals, for games in which colours were given:
White wins - 384269 (40.83%)
Draws - 217610 (23.12%)
Black wins - 339235 (36.05%)
Total - 941114
So White score 52.39% in total.
White wins - 384269 (40.83%)
Draws - 217610 (23.12%)
Black wins - 339235 (36.05%)
Total - 941114
So White score 52.39% in total.
Former ECF Grading System Programmer
-
- Posts: 1420
- Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 6:31 pm
Re: Estimating White's Advantage
Howard Grist wrote:Analysis of the ECF grading database reveals, for games in which colours were given:
White wins - 384269 (40.83%)
Draws - 217610 (23.12%)
Black wins - 339235 (36.05%)
Total - 941114
So White score 52.39% in total.
In the British Championships, championship section the FIDE rating difference figs for 2015, 2014, 2011 and 2010 (2013 and 2012 unavailable) are:-
Code: Select all
Year Average Average Average
White Black Rating
Rating Rating Difference
2015 2152 2148 4
2014 2183 2179 4
2011 2240 2232 8
2010 2226 2224 2
-
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
- Location: Croydon
Re: Estimating White's Advantage
I have to accept that that is an interesting finding.E Michael White wrote:In the British Championships, championship section the FIDE rating difference figs for 2015, 2014, 2011 and 2010 (2013 and 2012 unavailable) are:-
Arbiter conduct in tournaments can contribute to the better performance of white causing bias of up to about 10% of the increased performance. Just as most of us are right handed it may be that arbiters concentrate on white seekers more than black seekers when looking at stronger players.Code: Select all
Year Average Average Average White Black Rating Rating Rating Difference 2015 2152 2148 4 2014 2183 2179 4 2011 2240 2232 8 2010 2226 2224 2
Would you be able to do the same exercise for a tournament which uses computer rather than manual pairings?
If there is a pro-White bias, that should help to establish whether it's caused by arbiter performance, as you suggest, or by some far from obvious defect in the Swiss Pairing Regulations.
-
- Posts: 8478
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm
Re: Estimating White's Advantage
I don't think that any of these figures has strong statistical significance in itself - the 8 may be borderline. However, it is difficult to ignore the fact that they are all positive. Analysis of other events is clearly needed.David Sedgwick wrote: I have to accept that that is an interesting finding.
Would you be able to do the same exercise for a tournament which uses computer rather than manual pairings?
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.
-
- Posts: 1420
- Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 6:31 pm
Re: Estimating White's Advantage
I’m afraid I can’t produce that information easily, as I do not know exactly which events use computer or manual pairings.David Sedgwick wrote:Would you be able to do the same exercise for a tournament which uses computer rather than manual pairings? .
This pro white stronger player bias has existed for 30-40 years. I wouldn’t be surprised if the reasons varied over time.David Sedgwick wrote:If there is a pro-White bias, that should help to establish whether it's caused by arbiter performance, as you suggest, or by some far from obvious defect in the Swiss Pairing Regulations.
My initial post was to show that a straight assessment of White’s advantage by looking at the overall result percentage is dubious. I did not want to become involved in an assessment of arbiter performance as you suggest but chose the British Championship as games are readily available and all ratings shown; some may be ECF conversions. I expect arbiters conduct the pairing exercise in the British Championships by following the regulations carefully.
The following information may be of interest. I can’t completely guarantee accuracy of the Chessbase10 analysis icon or the collected data. However if anyone else wants to check individual tournaments it is relatively easy.
Recent TWICS, these will be mostly tournaments with some team matches.
Code: Select all
Year File game average average average White
count White Black difference %
rating rating score
2015 TWICS1081 5557 2162 2157 5 54
2015 TWICS1082 5606 2123 2115 8 54
2015 TWICS1083 4136 2186 2183 3 54
2015 TWICS1084 4140 2176 2172 4 54
2015 TWICS1085 4313 2169 2161 8 54
Data source: TWICS
Data Analysis: Chessbase10 statistics icon
Last edited by E Michael White on Sun Apr 08, 2018 10:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 8478
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm
Re: Estimating White's Advantage
If the numbers in the box above really are as they appear ( I don't know why they wouldn't be, but an independent check is always valuable ), they are quite startling. The FIDE Commission overseeing Swiss pairings should certainly take a look.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.