European Team Chs in Warsaw

[NickFaulks]

Alex says "I just think that using gamepoints rather than matchpoints detracts from the event somehow, although I can't put my finger on why."

I can. It's a team competition, consisting of teams trying to win matches rather than individuals trying to score maximium points in a big Swiss. I think that adds something.

I'm sure many others will remember Simon Webb's chapter on this in Chess for Tigers.

[Richard Bates]

Alex says "I just think that using gamepoints rather than matchpoints detracts from the event somehow, although I can't put my finger on why."

I can. It's a team competition, consisting of teams trying to win matches rather than individuals trying to score maximium points in a big Swiss. I think that adds something.

I'm sure many others will remember Simon Webb's chapter on this in Chess for Tigers.

Of course that is the argument for using matchpoints. However the argument also loses something when by definition many of the teams won't play each other. For most of its existence the Olympiad was about determining the best team of players, not necessarily the best match performers. The current format takes a different approach. I

Clearly in knockout chess or leagues it would be silly to do anything else. Of course you could try an change the Olympiad into some sort of league/league or league/knockout format - with qualification a la football. This would remove many of the vagaries of Swisses. First half of the tournament determining the broad finishing groups, second half the detailed placings.

[LawrenceCooper]

No strong thoughts on this except that the idea of a team winning all its matches and not winning the event would seem unsatisfactory to me (as could have happened in the much smaller and round robin Glorney Cup this year).

[Alan Walton]

One possible option is to use a bonus point system, win the match get 2 points, and if the score is 4-0 or 3.5-0.5 then you get a bonus point

[Richard Bates]

No strong thoughts on this except that the idea of a team winning all its matches and not winning the event would seem unsatisfactory to me (as could have happened in the much smaller and round robin Glorney Cup this year).

Round Robin/league is different. Winning all your matches arguably only has absolute value if you play all the other teams. Alan's bonus point suggestion has maybe merit although for those who see the match result as important it suffers the same flaws (bit like the 3-1-0 system). And one could look at the gamepoint system as a 'bonus point' system. 1/2 point bonus/penalty for every 1/2 pt scored/conceded

[Alan Walton]

The UK Open (PDC) darts event actually have no seeding at all, and after every round you have a draw for the next

So may do away with seeding (apart from Round 1), 2 points for a win (etc.) then a random draw for the teams on the same score, then nobody has any complaints about obscure methodologies

[Ola Winfridsson]

The Swiss system didn't work well for "37" olympiads. Before WWII the olympiads were played as all play alls with match points counting ahead of game points. After the war the event swelled so much that the needed qualifyings groups and finals, still in the old all play all format though. It was not until the 1976 Haifa olympiad that the Swiss system was introduced. System works well in the sense that the winner tends to be the best team all round, but for many teams it's a question of bobbing along, and managing to get a few nice big wins at the end.

As for a successful Swiss gambit, Sweden ended up in 9th to 18th place (16th on tiebreak) in 2012 after beating Brazil in the last round. Brazil was the only higher seeded team they managed to beat in the entire event. The only faced three teams rated higher than them (with Croatia as the 19th seed being the highest). Having lost to United Arab Emirates in round 4, they were down to board 47 and mighty Andorra before fortunes finally turned. Even then it wasn't plain sailing. They suffered terrible mauling by Slovenia in round 7, and only managed to get onto 4 match winning streak after a nervous win over Nigeria in round 8. In my amateur eyes an underwhelming performance all told, but at the same time, you can only play the teams the less than ideal pairing system throws at you. I'm very happy to see Sweden having got off to a far better and more promising start in these European Team Championships.

[Stewart Reuben]

I never suggested the system of counting BOTH match and game points because I thought it was too complicated for people.
That is. 2 for a match win, 1 for a draw, 0 for a loss. That is added to the game points. Thus you could win
2 + 2.5 = 4.5
2 + 3 = 5
2 + 3.5 = 5.5
2 + 4 = 6. You could vary the ratio as you wished and also get rid of fractions. This combines both objectives. It may have defect of bringing the leading teams together too early. You could attempt to overcome that with the pairing system, perhaps using only match points for the first 3 rounds.

The irony is that they chose instead a system for Dresden 2008 that I didn't understand.

Ola, the Swiss System is renowned for not working well if your objective is partly to sort out the middle-scoring teams. My system hs the advantage that very few teams would get the same score, so the use of any tiebreak system would be minimised. All tiebreak systems are useless, but some are more useless than others.

[benedgell]

Terrific result for Gawain today!

[benedgell]

Sadly it appears Mickey misplayed a winning position, and the men will have to settle for a draw against Russia. Nevertheless, a great effort from the team.

[LawrenceCooper]

Bo. 1 RUSSIA Rtg - 5 ENGLAND Rtg 2 : 2
8.1 GM GRISCHUK, Alexander 2785 - GM ADAMS, Michael 2752 ½ - ½
8.2 GM SVIDLER, Peter 2752 - GM MCSHANE, Luke J 2696 1 - 0
8.3 GM ANDREIKIN, Dmitry 2710 - GM SHORT, Nigel D 2680 ½ - ½
8.4 GM MOROZEVICH, Alexander 2727 - GM JONES, Gawain C B 2648 0 - 1

Bo. 23 England Rtg - 18 Czech Republic Rtg 0 : 4
14.1 WFM Chevannes, Sabrina 2200- WIM Havlikova, Kristyna2237 0 - 1
14.2 WGM Corke, Anya S 2276 - WIM Olsarova, Karolina 2275 0 - 1
14.3 WFM Grigoryan, Meri 2039 - WIM Olsarova, Tereza 2248 0 - 1
14.4 WFM Bhatia, Kanwal K 2039 - WIM Sikorova, Olga 2278 0 - 1

[LawrenceCooper]

Round 4:

Open:

9 ENGLAND MONTENEGRO

1 GM DJUKIC Nikola 2543
2 GM BLAGOJEVIC Dragisa 2524
3 GM DRASKO Milan 2447
4 GM KOSIC Dragan 2504

Women:

16 Italy England

1 IM Sedina Elena 2302
2 IM Zimina Olga 2338
3 WIM Brunello Marina 2248
4 WFM Messina Roberta 2064
5 Gueci Tea 2056

[JustinHadi]

Excellent result for Gawain

[LawrenceCooper]

Round 4 board pairings:

Bo. 5 ENGLAND Rtg - 30 MONTENEGRO Rtg 0 : 0
9.1 GM ADAMS, Michael 2752 - GM DJUKIC, Nikola 2543
9.2 GM MCSHANE, Luke J 2696 - GM DRASKO, Milan 2447
9.3 GM SHORT, Nigel D 2680 - GM KOSIC, Dragan 2504
9.4 GM JONES, Gawain C B2648 - GM NIKCEVIC, Nebojsa2428

Bo. 20 Italy Rtg - 23 England Rtg 0 : 0
16.1 IM Zimina, Olga 2338 - IM Ciuksyte, Dagne 2355
16.2 WIM Brunello, Marina 2248 - WGM Corke, Anya S 2276
16.3 WFM Messina, Roberta 2064 - WFM Grigoryan, Meri 2039
16.4 Gueci, Tea 2056 - WFM Bhatia, Kanwal K 2039

[David Robertson]

Did you see Alan Tate's astonishing Rd 3 win yesterday? It was his second 2500+ GM scalp in two days. He remains Scotland's only winner so far. I'll not spoil your amusement by saying anything about the game. But if you can play it through via Houdini, you'll soon see where the astonishment lies.