British Championships 2012 - Games

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: British Championships 2012 - Games

Post by Alex Holowczak » Tue Aug 07, 2012 6:12 pm

Mike Gunn wrote:If a tournament organiser wants to encourage chess which is more interesting for the spectators then increasing the weighting for a win (compared to a draw) is one way of doing it. It was done in football for the same reason and nobody has suggested going back to the ols system.
I would. I haven't done the statistics for this still, but my strong suspicion is that actually, it made no difference at all to either the percentage of draws per season, or the number of goals scored per game.

It's a bit like the perceived wisdom of saying that increasing the number of points for a try from 4 to 5 meant more teams tried to play attacking rugby, resulting in more tries, and fewer penalties/drop goals. What might have happened is that teams will more happily commit defensive penalties, because it's more beneficial to concede two penalties than it is to concede one converted try. It could be argued that if you want to see more tries, then actually, you need to make it something like 2 points for a try, so that teams would rather concede a try than give away a penalty. The problem for comparing 4 v 5 points for a try is that it happened at the same sort of time that rugby union went professional, so there are loads of other variables involved.

All of these things are useful experiments though, to see what the impact on the game actually is.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: British Championships 2012 - Games

Post by Alex Holowczak » Tue Aug 07, 2012 6:39 pm

I've now done some statistics.

Code: Select all

Year	Draws	Goals
1971	140	1089
1972	129	1160
1973	130	1160
1974	149	1107
1975	124	1213
1976	127	1230
1977	137	1183
1978	132	1231
1979	144	1217
1980	134	1159
1981	118	1228
1982	120	1173
1983	111	1264
1984	118	1250
1985	107	1288
1986	110	1288
1987	123	1215
Above is the data for the First Division of the Football League between 1970-71 (which is what's meant by 1971), and 1986-87, the last season before it reduced from 22 teams to 21, then 20. After which season was three points for a win introduced, would people think, based on those numbers?

Alex McFarlane
Posts: 1556
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:52 pm

Re: British Championships 2012 - Games

Post by Alex McFarlane » Tue Aug 07, 2012 8:10 pm

I hope Steve Giddins doesn't accuse me of going into Stewart Reuben mode but ......
:D :D :D :D

Had I still been in charge it was my intention to suggest that the Armageddon was based on the American system with both players bidding to be Black. Since this was not announced in advance, even though I was the arbiter, I did not think it appropriate to spring it on the players.

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 4206
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: British Championships 2012 - Games

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Wed Aug 08, 2012 7:57 am

I don't think 3 points for a win encourages more aggressive play. The tournaments where it is used also tend to invite people who play aggressively anyway, so it is difficult to measure if the scoring system makes a difference.

(Years ago, RCA Lee-Pentecost suggested a system for leagues which was 3 for a win, 2 for a draw, 1 for a loss and 0 for default. This was kicked out rapidly, but it has the merit of rewarding you for putting a full team out, and I guess you would get used to 16-16 draws in an 8 board match.)

The problem when you have a trophy is normally you want one winner, so you have to do something. It would not be so bad having two joint-winners maybe, but if you had about seven, that seems less desirable.
"Kevin was the arbiter and was very patient. " Nick Grey

harrylamb
Posts: 147
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 1:33 am

Re: British Championships 2012 - Games

Post by harrylamb » Wed Aug 08, 2012 9:18 am

Kevin Thurlow wrote:(Years ago, RCA Lee-Pentecost suggested a system for leagues which was 3 for a win, 2 for a draw, 1 for a loss and 0 for default.
This is the way the French national league scores. But on a match basis not an individual game basis. You get

3 points if you win a match
2 points if you draw a match
1 point if you lose but the team turns up
0 points if you default the match.

We have also used it as the scoring system in Manchester for some of our beginner junior congresses. The advantage is that if you play in a five round tournament you are guaranteed to go home with five points provided you do not default. You can then happily tell your friends and parents that you scored five points. :D Much better than having to confess that you scored zero. :cry:
No taxation without representation

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: British Championships 2012 - Games

Post by Alex Holowczak » Wed Aug 08, 2012 9:38 am

The system used for the Birmingham Summer (Rapidplay) League was the traditional 2/1/0 for match wins, but with a twist.

Because it was rapidplay, there were two matches per evening. Both matches had the 2/1/0 element, but if a team won on aggregate over the two matches, then it scored a bonus point for winning the match.

So if A beat B 3-1 in the first match, and lost 2.5-1.5 in the second match, then A would score 3 points for the fixture, and B would score 2 points. (They each won one match, and A beat B 5.5-4.5 on aggregate.)

This bonus point system could be used in any league that has a double APA; there's no reason why the gamepoints couldn't be aggregated over two matches at opposite ends of the season.

The "advantage" of this system is that there's more to play for than the traditional system. If you win match 1 5-1, but can only field a weak team for the return match, rather than getting a pasting, it's still worth your while putting the weak team out, in the hope they can "only" lose 4.5-1.5 and hence get the bonus point. There should be something to play for, for longer.

Alistair Campbell
Posts: 333
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 12:53 pm

Re: British Championships 2012 - Games

Post by Alistair Campbell » Fri Aug 10, 2012 1:13 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote:I've now done some statistics.

Code: Select all

 lots of data
Above is the data for the First Division of the Football League between 1970-71 (which is what's meant by 1971), and 1986-87, the last season before it reduced from 22 teams to 21, then 20. After which season was three points for a win introduced, would people think, based on those numbers?
Haha. Clearly I'm meant to say after 1979/80 as there looks to have been a sea-change thereafter in terms of goals and draws. (Which will be correlated). I think it was actually after 1980/81. Arguably the effect of Villa's settled side and Palace's general rubbishness made the last season of 2 points for a win a bit of a freak. There still does look to be some evidence of an effect however.

My own a priori (is that the expression?) view would have been 3 points for a win may have made a marginal difference initially but any effect has long since worn off.

Returning to chess, the Glenrothes Congress for many years espoused a 3-1-0 scoring system (albeit with a 1-1/2-0 pairing system). It may be significant that this experiment was abandoned after a while.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 9085
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: British Championships 2012 - Games

Post by Alex Holowczak » Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:11 pm

Alistair Campbell wrote:Haha. Clearly I'm meant to say after 1979/80 as there looks to have been a sea-change thereafter in terms of goals and draws. (Which will be correlated). I think it was actually after 1980/81. Arguably the effect of Villa's settled side and Palace's general rubbishness made the last season of 2 points for a win a bit of a freak. There still does look to be some evidence of an effect however.
You're right; the data changes you might expect happened the season before the rulechange was introduced. There's a sample size issue, which means one might want to repeat the experiment with (say) Division Two, Division Three, and so on. Perhaps even leagues in other countries, when they made the switch.
Alistair Campbell wrote:My own a priori (is that the expression?) view would have been 3 points for a win may have made a marginal difference initially but any effect has long since worn off.
What we don't know is whether or not there was a change in mentality. Did the teams decide to behave differently because there were 3 points for a win instead of 2? If it was a 1-1 draw after 80 minutes, did the stronger team on paper try to win more when there were 3 points for the win, rather than 2?

David Howell was interviewed by Tryfon Gavriel at an early London Chess Classic. He was asked about whether the 3-1-0 system made any difference to their approach to the game, and the reply was that it didn't. It'd be interesting to hear the responses from other players about that.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 19267
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: British Championships 2012 - Games

Post by Roger de Coverly » Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:16 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote: He was asked about whether the 3-1-0 system made any difference to their approach to the game, and the reply was that it didn't.
The London Chess Classic has become notorious for long games. Presumably not being allowed to agree a draw without the arbiter's agreement comes into it. Players wishing to be re-invited in future years may come into it as well.

David Gilbert
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 10:03 am

Re: British Championships 2012 - Games

Post by David Gilbert » Sun Aug 12, 2012 9:13 am

This may be of interest. From the excellent London Civil Service, Post Office & Municipal Chess League Website:

Gawain Jones won the 99th British Championship after beating Stephen Gordon in the playoff. Both of them had finished with the excellent score of 9/11.
The Championship featured many fine games, but surely none as entertaining as Jack Rudd v Nick Walker in round 10.


A game that might have been overlooked by some watchers ...... http://www.cscl.org.uk/game0032.htm

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 8271
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: British Championships 2012 - Games

Post by JustinHorton » Sun Aug 12, 2012 10:07 am

They might want to fix their playthrough: they've lost their bold after move seven.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Andrew Bak
Posts: 835
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 11:48 am
Location: Bradford
Contact:

Re: British Championships 2012 - Games

Post by Andrew Bak » Sun Aug 12, 2012 10:34 am

David Gilbert wrote:This may be of interest. From the excellent London Civil Service, Post Office & Municipal Chess League Website:

Gawain Jones won the 99th British Championship after beating Stephen Gordon in the playoff. Both of them had finished with the excellent score of 9/11.
The Championship featured many fine games, but surely none as entertaining as Jack Rudd v Nick Walker in round 10.


A game that might have been overlooked by some watchers ...... http://www.cscl.org.uk/game0032.htm
There were a lot of exciting games this tournament! Jones vs Hawkins in Round 8 won the Best Game Prize.

We also thought Rudd vs Walker was the most entertaining game of Round 10.

Post Reply