Author |
Topic: 2009 World Championship (Read 9049 times) |
|
omar
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2
Gender: 
Posts: 1003
|
 |
Re: 2009 World Championship
« Reply #120 on: Feb 22nd, 2009, 8:28pm » |
 Quote  Modify
|
Toby informed me that the new time was discussed in the game comments here:
http://arimaa.com/arimaa/gameroom/comments.cgi?gid=97343
I checked with the TD and got approval to extend this game into next week.
This game has been rescheduled and the games for round 3 have been postponed to next week.
In the future though I would like to ask the players not to extend the game outside of the time setup for the current round.
|
|
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: 2009 World Championship
« Reply #121 on: Feb 22nd, 2009, 9:31pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I confess I am unhappy with the precedent of delaying the tournament. Next time someone can't make their scheduled game time, and the two players can't reschedule within the week, how can we not delay the tournament for a whole week to accommodate them too? It would be unfair to do something different next time. Indeed, the present ruling already makes an awkward contrast to the preliminaries when we didn't delay the tournament for a week to correct for a server error. The only consistent thing between the two rulings seems to be that the rules are just suggestions.
I guess in our little circle where we are all friends it works out fine. It's no great hardship for me to have to wait another week to get pummeled by chessandgo, and there is merit in having 99of9 vs. camelback be decided on the board rather than by forfeit. Nevertheless I believe that in the long run a pattern of circumventing the rules can't help but end in hard feelings.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
camelback
Forum Guru
Arimaa perl monger
Gender:
Posts: 144
|
|
Re: 2009 World Championship
« Reply #122 on: Feb 22nd, 2009, 10:07pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Thank you for rescheduling the game.
I never thought about the repercussions of my request. I thought just the scheduling would be postponed by a day not the whole tourney. I apologize to the community for this delay.
Is it absolutely neccessary to postpone the tourney? Just delaying the scheduling for the next round not possible?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
chessandgo
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #1889
Gender:
Posts: 1244
|
|
Re: 2009 World Championship
« Reply #123 on: Feb 23rd, 2009, 12:30am » |
Quote Modify
|
For my own game I'd be delighted not to have to play at midnight after a travel, but like Karl I'm surprised that the finals are delayed to accomodate a player while the prelims were not after a server problem.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
99of9
Forum Guru
Gnobby's creator (player #314)
 
Gender:
Posts: 1413
|
|
Re: 2009 World Championship
« Reply #124 on: Feb 23rd, 2009, 4:46am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Feb 22nd, 2009, 8:28pm, omar wrote:| In the future though I would like to ask the players not to extend the game outside of the time setup for the current round. |
|
It was either that or a forfeit. I didn't give camelback the choice of another slot within the round (because I couldn't). So in this instance "the players" didn't really have the possibility of doing as you ask. It's up to the rules and the TD whether the proposal gets accepted. That's why I referred camelback to the TD, as I realized it was going outside the bounds. Perhaps I should have made that clearer.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
ChrisB
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2339
Gender:
Posts: 147
|
|
Re: 2009 World Championship
« Reply #125 on: Feb 23rd, 2009, 6:03am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Feb 22nd, 2009, 10:07pm, camelback wrote:| Is it absolutely neccessary to postpone the tourney? Just delaying the scheduling for the next round not possible? |
|
I'm confused why the tournament would need to be delayed. Couldn't the round three games be scheduled for this week, say on Tuesday evening (i.e., by early Wednesday GMT)?
|
| « Last Edit: Feb 23rd, 2009, 6:08am by ChrisB » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
RonWeasley
Forum Guru
Harry's friend (Arimaa player #441)
Gender:
Posts: 882
|
|
Re: 2009 World Championship
« Reply #126 on: Feb 23rd, 2009, 6:22am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Feb 22nd, 2009, 9:31pm, Fritzlein wrote:I confess I am unhappy with the precedent of delaying the tournament. Next time someone can't make their scheduled game time, and the two players can't reschedule within the week, how can we not delay the tournament for a whole week to accommodate them too? It would be unfair to do something different next time. Indeed, the present ruling already makes an awkward contrast to the preliminaries when we didn't delay the tournament for a week to correct for a server error. The only consistent thing between the two rulings seems to be that the rules are just suggestions.
I guess in our little circle where we are all friends it works out fine. It's no great hardship for me to have to wait another week to get pummeled by chessandgo, and there is merit in having 99of9 vs. camelback be decided on the board rather than by forfeit. Nevertheless I believe that in the long run a pattern of circumventing the rules can't help but end in hard feelings. |
|
Maybe I don't have all the facts straight, but here's the situation as I know it.
There was confusion by the tournament coordinator (Omar) in the rescheduling requests for the 99of9 vs. camelback game. Because camelback's request was rather late, I did not feel we were compelled to honor it, so 99of9 had the right to claim the win by forfeit. Instead 99of9 elected to reschedule to Tuesday, according to the replacement game provision posted earlier in this thread. Because Tuesday is close enough to the weekend associated with round 2, this is not an unacceptable delay for a round 2 game. Therefore I'm approving it.
The game in the preliminaries, woh vs soldier, was interrupted by a server error and the tournament would have been delayed to allow this game to be continued. However, soldier elected to forfeit, citing personal circumstances, so I approved the request. Note that the precedent for delaying the tournament for server and scheduling errors would have been applied.
I believe the tournament rules were applied correctly in both of these cases.
I'm not understanding how the scheduling of 99of9 vs camelback is a delay in the tournament. I expect round 3 games to take place next weekend (2/2 as originally planned. I've been assuming the scheduler can be run very soon after the results of this game are known. Is this not enough lead time?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: 2009 World Championship
« Reply #127 on: Feb 23rd, 2009, 8:17am » |
Quote Modify
|
Both cases are difficult, and I am not saying that the ruling in either case was unreasonable. The was merit in not delaying the tournament before, and there is merit in letting 99of9 and camelback decide their game over the board. I do believe, however, that neither ruling is strictly in accordance with the written rules. That is not to say there is no benefit in being somewhat flexible with the rules, but I think there is also an eventual cost to flexibility.
on Feb 23rd, 2009, 6:22am, RonWeasley wrote:| Instead 99of9 elected to reschedule to Tuesday, according to the replacement game provision posted earlier in this thread. |
|
Maybe I read the replacement game provision incorrectly at the time, but fortunately it is still there:
on Jan 12th, 2009, 6:01am, RonWeasley wrote:| In the event of a game won by forfeit or a connection loss before gold's move 3 is registered, the winner may elect to invalidate that game and play a replacement game within 24 hours of the original games start. The winner of the original game has no obligation to offer a replacement game. If a replacement game is not played within 24 hours, the outcome of the original game takes precedence. |
|
The rule clearly gives a 24-hour time window, but in the present case there is a delay of over 48 hours, so it doesn't fit the rule, correct? Or am I misreading it?
Quote:| I'm not understanding how the scheduling of 99of9 vs camelback is a delay in the tournament. I expect round 3 games to take place next weekend (2/2 as originally planned. I've been assuming the scheduler can be run very soon after the results of this game are known. Is this not enough lead time? |
|
I suppose the pairing and scheduling doesn't have to be done on the schedule that Omar has used in past rounds, and that it could be compressed between Round 2 and Round 3 of the finals. But my point is not that the ruling is bad because a delay is horrendous; my point is that if we make an exception now it will be unfair not to make an exception later. For example, in Round 3 chessandgo and I have no time that is a good time for both of us within the 119 given time slots. The upshot is that the game will start at midnight for him, and will we stay within the constraints of the tournament schedule. But what if he and I did have a good common time on Tuesday even though we had no good common time within the scheduler? Would we be allowed to play on Tuesday instead? If not, why not?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
chessandgo
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #1889
Gender:
Posts: 1244
|
|
Re: 2009 World Championship
« Reply #128 on: Feb 23rd, 2009, 8:47am » |
Quote Modify
|
The decisions Ned takes as TD are always right by definition unless I'm mistaken.
on Feb 23rd, 2009, 6:22am, RonWeasley wrote:| I expect round 3 games to take place next weekend (2/2 as originally planned. |
|
on Feb 22nd, 2009, 8:28pm, omar wrote:
This game has been rescheduled and the games for round 3 have been postponed to next week.
|
|
On the other hand it'd would be good for us players (err for me at least) to know as soon as possible if the games will take place this week or next week (to know how I will have to handle my travel).
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
RonWeasley
Forum Guru
Harry's friend (Arimaa player #441)
Gender:
Posts: 882
|
|
Re: 2009 World Championship
« Reply #129 on: Feb 23rd, 2009, 9:46am » |
Quote Modify
|
At the heart of this issue is that scheduling is inherently very difficult. We're in different time zones and we have commitments outside the tournament. Current tournament rules attempt to address this difficulty. We're finding that they are not satisfying everybody in all situations. As TD, I have some authority to make things happen the way "we" want them to if the rules seem to be failing to do what "we" intended. Part of the problem of being TD is that I have to estimate what this "we" means and wants. My interpretation is a tournament where winners are decided over the board as much as is practical, with scheduling being the hardest practicality. Fritzlien is correct that I am deviating from the written rules and that doing that capriciously is bad for the integrity of the tournament (think about future tournaments here). My expectation is that scheduling rules will be changed in the future to better represent what "we" want. My current rulings are an attempt to anticipate those changes to make the current tournament closer to the future ideal.
on Feb 23rd, 2009, 8:17am, Fritzlein wrote:
Maybe I read the replacement game provision incorrectly at the time, but fortunately it is still there:
The rule clearly gives a 24-hour time window, but in the present case there is a delay of over 48 hours, so it doesn't fit the rule, correct? Or am I misreading it?
I suppose the pairing and scheduling doesn't have to be done on the schedule that Omar has used in past rounds, and that it could be compressed between Round 2 and Round 3 of the finals. But my point is not that the ruling is bad because a delay is horrendous; my point is that if we make an exception now it will be unfair not to make an exception later. For example, in Round 3 chessandgo and I have no time that is a good time for both of us within the 119 given time slots. The upshot is that the game will start at midnight for him, and will we stay within the constraints of the tournament schedule. But what if he and I did have a good common time on Tuesday even though we had no good common time within the scheduler? Would we be allowed to play on Tuesday instead? If not, why not? |
|
Fritzlein quotes correctly. This case makes me believe that the 24 hour limit is too arbitrary and too short. An absolute deadline seems more appropriate, but it's not clear what the deadline should be. End of the day Tuesday? Later? Earlier? This depends on scheduling logistics for the next round. More debate required, apparently, but I'd like to see this resolved by next year's WC. For 99of9 vs camelback, a Tuesday morning 4:00am EST seems reasonable right now.
For the Fritzlein vs chessandgo game, if the players propose a reasonable game time outside the defined time window, my first inclination would be to approve it. This goes for any game. The automatic scheduler is a tool, not a master.
Finally, thanx to those participating in this debate. While the TD gets the final say, it's healthy for the community to bring issues to the front so we get a chance to make things better for everyone.
|
| « Last Edit: Feb 23rd, 2009, 9:48am by RonWeasley » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
omar
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2
Gender:
Posts: 1003
|
|
Re: 2009 World Championship
« Reply #130 on: Feb 23rd, 2009, 11:17am » |
Quote Modify
|
Sorry about the delay guys; it's due to my programs. Once the time for the start of slot 1 has passed it aligns slot 1 to the same time next week. I was thinking of doing it manually, but this week I also have to get the second server setup for the bot tournament.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: 2009 World Championship
« Reply #131 on: Feb 23rd, 2009, 11:25am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Feb 23rd, 2009, 9:46am, RonWeasley wrote:| This case makes me believe that the 24 hour limit is too arbitrary and too short. An absolute deadline seems more appropriate, but it's not clear what the deadline should be. |
|
I agree that an absolute deadline makes more sense than a 24-hour window. A natural choice for the absolute deadline is for it to be the same as the last time slot offered by the scheduler.
Quote:| For the Fritzlein vs chessandgo game, if the players propose a reasonable game time outside the defined time window, my first inclination would be to approve it. This goes for any game. The automatic scheduler is a tool, not a master. |
|
The problem with allowing reasonable times outside the scheduler is that it is not well-defined. If "reasonable" is the rule, then we can't be sure what the rule is. Yes, that has the advantage of insuring that the scheduler is a tool, not a master. On the negative side, when the scheduler's decisions are not binding it makes the tool less effective, and it invites the players to create situations which are problematic for the Tournament Director to rule on. Knowing that 04:00 EST Tuesday is a reasonable time invites everyone to feel that 10:00 EST Tuesday is a reasonable time as well, and to feel that the Tournament Director is being unreasonable if he does not allow it. And if he does allow it, expectations adjust that even further into Tuesday is acceptable, until at some point in some future tournament, someone feels cheated.
It seems that the only way to avoid this conundrum is to have a well-defined rescheduling window. And if it is well-defined, I don't see any benefit from having a re-scheduling window different from the scheduling window. Having more slack for re-scheduling than for scheduling creates an incentive for re-scheduling as a matter of course when a later time seems appealing.
Quote:| My expectation is that scheduling rules will be changed in the future to better represent what "we" want. |
|
The case for bending the rules mid-tournament would be stronger if we all agreed that we wanted the future rules to be the way we are bending them in the present. I, for one, don't want the future rules to accommodate times outside of the scheduler. Scheduling is hard enough as it is, and I can't think of a more clean and fair solution than what we have now.
Quote:| Finally, thanx to those participating in this debate. While the TD gets the final say, it's healthy for the community to bring issues to the front so we get a chance to make things better for everyone. |
|
Thank you for embracing an open discussion. From your previous posts in this thread (quoted below) it is clear that you understand that failing to abide by the literal rules, even when it is done for a good reason, has an associated cost. I recall you also demonstrated this commitment in your ruling from the 2007 World Championship that I would not be allowed to resume my game with chessandgo although we both wanted it to be decided on the board rather than by Internet connection difficulties.
Although I would have made a different decision in both of the recent cases, I respect your decisions and your right to make them. I certainly don't consider your decisions capricious. Thank you for your continuing contribution in the role of Tournament Director.
on Feb 5th, 2009, 10:13am, RonWeasley wrote:| Just a reminder that this format change discussion really applies to future WC tournaments. We're committed to the current rules unless something fundamentally unfair is discovered. |
|
|
| « Last Edit: Feb 23rd, 2009, 11:46am by Fritzlein » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: 2009 World Championship
« Reply #132 on: Feb 23rd, 2009, 11:31am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Feb 23rd, 2009, 11:17am, omar wrote:| Sorry about the delay guys; it's due to my programs. Once the time for the start of slot 1 has passed it aligns slot 1 to the same time next week. I was thinking of doing it manually, but this week I also have to get the second server setup for the bot tournament. |
|
I think people are suggesting that you do the scheduling Tuesday night as usual. If the scheduling is not delayed, it just means we lose the normal one-day gap between pairing and scheduling, because the pairing and scheduling would both have to occur on Tuesday.
I think that Ron is saying that of three choices (camelback's forfeit stands; we delay the tournament a week; we compress the pairing/scheduling) the last choice is best.
|
| « Last Edit: Feb 23rd, 2009, 11:34am by Fritzlein » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Adanac
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #892
Gender:
Posts: 635
|
|
Re: 2009 World Championship
« Reply #133 on: Feb 23rd, 2009, 1:19pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Feb 23rd, 2009, 11:17am, omar wrote:Sorry about the delay guys; it's due to my programs. Once the time for the start of slot 1 has passed it aligns slot 1 to the same time next week. I was thinking of doing it manually, but this week I also have to get the second server setup for the bot tournament.
|
|
We could save you the headache by discussing the best game times with our opponents in the chat room or on this forum. Then once we agree on a time & date, we can e-mail you and Ron.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
RonWeasley
Forum Guru
Harry's friend (Arimaa player #441)
Gender:
Posts: 882
|
|
Re: 2009 World Championship
« Reply #134 on: Feb 23rd, 2009, 1:19pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Feb 23rd, 2009, 11:31am, Fritzlein wrote:
I think that Ron is saying that of three choices (camelback's forfeit stands; we delay the tournament a week; we compress the pairing/scheduling) the last choice is best. |
|
It's been a challenge to keep up with this situation, but Fritz is correct here. To be even more specific, if I had been presented with these choices earlier, Saturday for example, I would choose in this order:
1) play the replacement game, compress the pairing/scheduling
2) have the forfeit stand
3) play the replacement game and delay a week
The prospect of delaying has been something of a surprise to me. Like a bludger. If the automated scheduler can't be made to work, we should try to schedule manually.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Login
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print