Page 5 of 5

Re: Candidates 2019

Posted: Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:08 pm
by Kevin Thurlow
"I know that my grumbling about Round Robins is becoming akin to Roger's grumbling about the membership system, but the Women's Candidates is a good example of why Round Robins - particularly of this length - can be a very poor format."

But at least you know with round robins, you almost certainly got the right winner, whereas with a Swiss or KO, maybe you didn't... I think the 1948 World Championship got the right winner.

I agree that if the winner is known well in advance, it is a bit boring.

Re: Candidates 2019

Posted: Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:55 pm
by Alex Holowczak
Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:08 pm
But at least you know with round robins, you almost certainly got the right winner
Chessplayers tend to equate "the right winner" with "the highest-rated player" rather too often.

Re: Candidates 2019

Posted: Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:04 pm
by Matt Mackenzie
That is because the latter often tends to be the former, that's why the ratings are what they are.

(yes, there are exceptions - but a lower rated player who wins a round robin has usually done so on merit)

Re: Candidates 2019

Posted: Sat Jun 15, 2019 8:14 am
by Mick Norris
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:55 pm
Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:08 pm
But at least you know with round robins, you almost certainly got the right winner
Chessplayers tend to equate "the right winner" with "the highest-rated player" rather too often.
Goryachkina has won on merit; she's far from the highest rated player here, in fact she's gained rating points in her first 11 games (she lost 0.1 in the draw that secured first place yesterday)

We've had a number of different Candidates formats, and it seems to be general consensus that this is the best format to ensure the best challenger in the WC match (which can otherwise be over quickly, if the champion is much better than the challenger); in particular, the women have objected to your preferred format of a knockout to determine either the challenger, or in some cases the champion

Most people who actually like top level chess (which I know excludes you, Alex :roll: ) like the format

Re: Candidates 2019

Posted: Sat Jun 15, 2019 8:23 am
by NickFaulks
Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 9:08 pm
I agree that if the winner is known well in advance, it is a bit boring.
But for each one like that you get a London Candidates.

Re: Candidates 2019

Posted: Sat Jun 15, 2019 9:27 am
by Alex Holowczak
Mick Norris wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 8:14 am
Goryachkina has won on merit; she's far from the highest rated player here, in fact she's gained rating points in her first 11 games (she lost 0.1 in the draw that secured first place yesterday)
Indeed - hence my congratulatory note on the previous page. It's an incredibly dominant performance in a tournament that looked evenly matched.
Mick Norris wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 8:14 am
We've had a number of different Candidates formats, and it seems to be general consensus that this is the best format to ensure the best challenger in the WC match (which can otherwise be over quickly, if the champion is much better than the challenger); in particular, the women have objected to your preferred format of a knockout to determine either the challenger, or in some cases the champion
There players objected to the changes when the Quarter Finals of the World Snooker Championship were reduced from 61 frames in 1972 to 31 frames in 1973. Of course the best players want the longest possible format - my point is that casual spectators don't. They want a format that builds to a climax.
Mick Norris wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 8:14 am
Most people who actually like top level chess (which I know excludes you, Alex :roll: ) like the format
I like the Grand Prix, World Cup and Olympiad. I tend not to like the myriad of Round Robins like Altibox, the memorial tournament in Azerbaijan, and the GCT. I like the tournament to build to a climax, and a knockout tournament does that better than the Round Robins. Even a Swiss does that better than Round Robins. But the knockouts also have excitement every 2-3 days as someone gets eliminated, which adds a series of checkpoints in terms of the story of the tournament. You don't get that with the Round Robin.

By the way, I think the Cricket World Cup format is poor for the same reason; now that Australia, New Zealand, India and England already look certain to be in the Semi Finals based on what has happened so far, the last three weeks of the group stage are spent ambling towards those 4 seemingly inevitably making the Semi Finals. 4 groups of 4 or 5 teams, followed by knockout - more or less copying the Rugby World Cup format - would have been much better, even if it did mean the world had to live with the risk that India might not make the knockout stage.

Re: Candidates 2019

Posted: Sat Jun 15, 2019 10:45 am
by NickFaulks
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 9:27 am
now that Australia, New Zealand, India and England already look certain to be in the Semi Finals
If you are confident, you can still back that combo at even money.

Re: Candidates 2019

Posted: Sat Jun 15, 2019 9:18 pm
by Nick Grey
Cricket World Cup is variable. Rain is likely to effect the last 3 weeks.
16 players double rounds all play alls. once every 4 years is my preference.

Re: Candidates 2019

Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2019 12:18 pm
by Brian Towers
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 9:27 am
By the way, I think the Cricket World Cup format is poor for the same reason; now that Australia, New Zealand, India and England already look certain to be in the Semi Finals
And then England lose to Sri Lanka. Oh dear! With matches against Australia, India and New Zealand still to come it's squeaky bum time for England fans.

Re: Candidates 2019

Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2019 5:39 pm
by JustinHorton
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 9:27 am
. Of course the best players want the longest possible format
What?

Re: Candidates 2019

Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2019 10:38 am
by Alex Holowczak
JustinHorton wrote:
Tue Jul 09, 2019 5:39 pm
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 9:27 am
. Of course the best players want the longest possible format
What?
The longer the format, the more likely the better player is to win. Judd Trump v someone like Mark Allen is less likely to be a win for Trump over 7 frames than it is over 35 frames. So Trump would rather the match be 35 frames to increase his chance of winning.

The point is that when designing a sporting event format, particularly a knockout tournament, the number of "upset" wins by the non-seed is a variable you can control reasonably accurately by the length of the matches. In snooker or darts, this might be the number of frames or legs/sets. In chess, it is the number of games and probably the length of the game (Blitz v Standard) too.

This is why the top-ranked snooker players howled objections when the UK Championship was cut from best-of-17 to best-of-11 in the early rounds about 10 years ago.

Re: Candidates 2019

Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2019 11:10 am
by Kevin Thurlow
"The longer the format, the more likely the better player is to win."

That's the point I was making about tournaments elsewhere. Having said that, the world snooker final which ended 18-3 was a bit depressing...

Re: Candidates 2019

Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2019 7:13 pm
by Alex Holowczak
Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 11:10 am
Having said that, the world snooker final which ended 18-3 was a bit depressing...
It was probably more depressing for John Parrott than it was for you. :wink:

I assume you're familiar with the Quarter Finals of the 1937 World Snooker Championship, and so you might have mentioned Joe Davis beating Bill Withers 30-1. The depressing part was that the match was best of 31 frames, not 59...

Perhaps Joe was inspired to do this given Withers beat his brother, Fred, 17-14 in the Qualifying Round.

Re: Candidates 2019

Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2019 2:20 am
by JustinHorton
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 10:38 am
JustinHorton wrote:
Tue Jul 09, 2019 5:39 pm
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 9:27 am
. Of course the best players want the longest possible format
What?
The longer the format, the more likely the better player is to win.
That may be so, and yet for all kinds of reasons the best players don't always, want the longest possible format.