Author |
Topic: 2011 World Championship (Read 21184 times) |
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender: 
Posts: 5928
|
 |
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #120 on: Jan 17th, 2011, 11:30pm » |
 Quote  Modify
|
on Jan 17th, 2011, 9:26pm, 99of9 wrote:| For example, if Fritz's timeout in round one had counted, would you really want to see that dragging him down if it comes down to a head to head shootout with Jean? |
|
I wouldn't mind each round being serious. Indeed, it seems odd to me that victories in the preliminaries count for less than victories in the finals. The player who becomes World Champion could have a worse total record (preliminaries and finals combined) than the second-place finisher, including a worse head-to-head.
But the worst part of the preliminary rounds counting less is, as I mentioned before, the possibility that someone could gain strategically by intentionally losing a preliminary game in order to insure a better position in the final. Last year three people potentially had this motive in the last round of the preliminaries. That's an ugly artifact of clearing out losses between the two.
on Jan 17th, 2011, 7:50pm, omar wrote:| The TD decided that we should assume a draw for Labadorboy's performance in round 2 and future rounds. So I will pair round 3 based on this decision. |
|
Nevermind's tournament fate may ride on this technicality. If he finishes 4-2, the extra SoS from treating Labradorboy as a 2.5 win player rather than a 0-win player could mean that Nevermind is in rather than out. Maybe that doesn't bother you, 99of9, but it sure bugs the heck out of Nombril! 
|
|
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
Sconibulus
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #4633
Gender:
Posts: 116
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #121 on: Jan 17th, 2011, 11:50pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Hmm, if we like both having prelims, and making SoS less important, perhaps the finals could be between all players who have at least as many wins as the eighth ranked player.
This might not entirely eliminate the tactical viability of throwing a game, but it would probably reduce it, as you'd be limited to altering first-round pairings, rather than getting a player you consider dangerous eliminated from the tournament. The exception to this might be with certain rare scenarios where one can boost 8th's score by an entire win, in which case, it would become even more tempting.
This being said, I'm much more in favour of the one-tournament solution. It's simple, straightforward, and while it doesn't provide a lot of opportunity for the newer players to have fun, there seem to be a lot more events running throughout the year than in previous years, so it doesn't really need to be too terribly newbie-friendly. It is the World Championship after all.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Nombril
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #4509
Gender:
Posts: 292
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #122 on: Jan 17th, 2011, 11:55pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 17th, 2011, 11:30pm, Fritzlein wrote:| but it sure bugs the heck out of Nombril! |
|
I suppose SoS is a necessary evil for providing seeds and scheduling rounds, but with so few rounds it seems too arbitrary to be deciding who gets to continue on in the tournament.
But I do agree with 99of9 that the Preliminary / Final break in the structure has strong appeal. I did float the idea of having a 1 game playoff to determine the final 8 in cases where there is a grouping of players tied for the last spot(s), but A) I don't know if it is mathematically proven that 1 game is enough to make that final distinction, B) Omar resists anything that lengthens the schedule, and C) Noone else seemed interested.
If the potential to throw the last game in the preliminary round to get a better pairing is a serious issue, why not consider random pairings for the double elimination portion?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Nevermind
Forum Full Member
Arimaa player #3181
Gender:
Posts: 16
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #123 on: Jan 18th, 2011, 3:55am » |
Quote Modify
|
Quote:
This being said, I'm much more in favour of the one-tournament solution. It's simple, straightforward, and while it doesn't provide a lot of opportunity for the newer players to have fun, there seem to be a lot more events running throughout the year than in previous years, so it doesn't really need to be too terribly newbie-friendly. It is the World Championship after all. |
|
I disagree. Though there has been an increasing number of events in which all players can participate and have fun, few have really been as comprehensive and been taken as seriously as the WC. Last year's WC was the first one I participated in, and I learned more from the 5 games that I played in that tournament than I did the last 200 games I played in the gameroom. I think it would be a great shame if newbie and average players such as myself would not be able to experience the tournament as much as they can currently.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Nevermind
Forum Full Member
Arimaa player #3181
Gender:
Posts: 16
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #124 on: Jan 18th, 2011, 4:00am » |
Quote Modify
|
Also let me just clarify that part of both the learning experience and the community experience that I valued so highly in the WC were the audio commentaries, written highlights and so forth that were provided.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Nombril
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #4509
Gender:
Posts: 292
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #125 on: Jan 18th, 2011, 8:56am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 17th, 2011, 11:50pm, Sconibulus wrote:| Hmm, if we like both having prelims, and making SoS less important, perhaps the finals could be between all players who have at least as many wins as the eighth ranked player. |
|
I like that idea - it is actually what my impression was after reading the rules for the first time last year. The 'format' section includes a chart about how many rounds will be played in the preliminary, along with a column for "# of wins needed". I had assumed if you made that threshold for number of wins, then you made the tournament. (Of course, it does state 'select the top 8 performers' just above that, but I think I was just skimming...)
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
omar
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2
Gender:
Posts: 1003
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #126 on: Jan 18th, 2011, 9:09am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 13th, 2011, 4:53pm, aaaa wrote:How do people currently feel about the only partial banking of time? To me, it makes the time reserve of a player at a given moment somewhat arbitrary and unfair. I would like to see it become 100% again, not penalizing any player for any kind of time management, flexible or not, and only rely on the maximum move time limit not to bore any spectators.
Too bad this forum doesn't appear to support polls. |
|
I think the server did not have support for the maximum time per move parameter (T) when we were deciding on the time control for the WC. There is a thread where Karl explained his reasoning for the time control that we currently use. We might need to look over that again and see how the T parameter effects it.
Here is that thread:
http://arimaa.com/arimaa/forum/cgi/YaBB.cgi?board=talk;action=display;nu m=1133477904
|
| « Last Edit: Jan 18th, 2011, 9:29am by omar » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #127 on: Jan 18th, 2011, 10:13am » |
Quote Modify
|
I just want to give a big shout out to Omar for his tireless efforts during the tournament so far. You're doing a great job, Omar. I'm having a wonderful time, and I know I'm not the only one. Thank you!
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Hippo
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #4450
Gender:
Posts: 883
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #128 on: Jan 18th, 2011, 11:03am » |
Quote Modify
|
@Forfeit case: if I understand it well, SoS describes how difficult opponent was the player fighting. I am not sure in the case there was not fight at all the stength of the opponent was 2.5 wins in turnament ... .
It seems to me it is much better comparable with bye.
I agree it's a pitty.
More interesting case would be forfeight in 3rd round of player with 1 win ... how it should affect the SOS of the 3 opponents?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Adanac
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #892
Gender:
Posts: 635
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #129 on: Jan 18th, 2011, 12:57pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 18th, 2011, 11:03am, Hippo wrote:@Forfeit case: if I understand it well, SoS describes how difficult opponent was the player fighting. I am not sure in the case there was not fight at all the stength of the opponent was 2.5 wins in turnament ... .
It seems to me it is much better comparable with bye.
I agree it's a pitty.
More interesting case would be forfeight in 3rd round of player with 1 win ... how it should affect the SOS of the 3 opponents? |
|
As I understand it right now, all 3 opponents would receive credit for a 1-win opponent regardless of whether they had to fight to win or just received credit for a forefeit victory. I'm OK with that system because it's simple and doesn't discredit a player for winning by forfeit (it's beyond his control).
I do agree that it's a bit generous to award Nevermind with a 2.5-win opponent when he was matched up with a first-round opponent who likely would have finished with only 1 or 2 wins. But, oh well, hopefully that doesn't become a deciding factor in the final standings and I hope even more that there are no further withdrawals, which would be an even bigger headache at the later stages of the tournament.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Nevermind
Forum Full Member
Arimaa player #3181
Gender:
Posts: 16
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #130 on: Jan 18th, 2011, 3:37pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Let me reiterate that I have personally expressed no opinion about what should be done in my case with regards to the forfeiting opponent. I do agree that the decision made is generous towards me.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Adanac
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #892
Gender:
Posts: 635
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #131 on: Jan 18th, 2011, 5:13pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 18th, 2011, 3:37pm, Nevermind wrote:| Let me reiterate that I have personally expressed no opinion about what should be done in my case with regards to the forfeiting opponent. I do agree that the decision made is generous towards me. |
|
Although it's a generous decision, ultimately it's unlikely to make much difference. Whether an opponent has 2 or 2.5 wins has little impact on a 4-2 player due to the high F factor in the Strength of Schedule formula. I wouldn't worry about it too much: if you advance to the finals it will be thanks to your hot start and it's extremely unlikely that this decision will be the deciding factor 
|
| « Last Edit: Jan 18th, 2011, 5:14pm by Adanac » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Sconibulus
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #4633
Gender:
Posts: 116
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #132 on: Jan 19th, 2011, 12:49am » |
Quote Modify
|
Could I request a delay for my round 3 game of 19 hours, moving it to 15:00 EST, Sunday the 23rd.
I sent a message requesting a change to The_Jeh, and that's the time he chose, The_Jeh, can you confirm this?
Thanks to everyone involved, it was my own fault, I was dumb and misread a schedule : () )
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
RonWeasley
Forum Guru
Harry's friend (Arimaa player #441)
Gender:
Posts: 882
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #133 on: Jan 19th, 2011, 8:25am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 18th, 2011, 3:37pm, Nevermind wrote:| Let me reiterate that I have personally expressed no opinion about what should be done in my case with regards to the forfeiting opponent. I do agree that the decision made is generous towards me. |
|
Yes, you may have reason to believe the decision was generous. People are welcome to do so. For the record, I assert the decision was neutral. If the same standard were applied to a highly rated forfeiting player, the decision could be interpreted as unfavorable. The forfeiting player was treated as an average player with an average SoS. This is how we will treat any forfieting player this year. The expectation of the success of a particular forfeiting player was not used in this decision because of problems in fairly assessing such an expectation. The goal in applying this standard is to make the expected value of its generosity to be neutral, realizing that it won't be neutral in particular cases, but that proving generosity or otherwise has too many complicating factors at this time.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
The_Jeh
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #634
Gender:
Posts: 460
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #134 on: Jan 19th, 2011, 9:04am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 19th, 2011, 12:49am, Sconibulus wrote:Could I request a delay for my round 3 game of 19 hours, moving it to 15:00 EST, Sunday the 23rd.
I sent a message requesting a change to The_Jeh, and that's the time he chose, The_Jeh, can you confirm this?
Thanks to everyone involved, it was my own fault, I was dumb and misread a schedule : () ) |
|
Yep.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Login
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print