Author |
Topic: 2012 World Championship (Read 9101 times) |
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender: 
Posts: 5928
|
 |
Re: 2012 World Championship
« Reply #30 on: Jan 29th, 2012, 7:04pm » |
 Quote  Modify
|
on Jan 29th, 2012, 5:54pm, chessandgo wrote:Next week will clearly be the best week to play me, I have no idea right now when I'll be available  Btw, is it ok for you if we shift the game time one hour earlier? I forgot that there'll be a one hour difference in France, midnight would be a bit late. |
|
One hour earlier, i.e. slot 71, is as good for me as 72. I will mark slot 71 as my only top priority to implement the agreement. I do want to win, but even so I hope you don't have to forfeit. 
|
|
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
chessandgo
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #1889
Gender:
Posts: 1244
|
|
Re: 2012 World Championship
« Reply #31 on: Jan 30th, 2012, 3:28am » |
Quote Modify
|
Thanks a lot, I've put slot 71 as my top slot as well!
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Tuks
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2626
Gender:
Posts: 203
|
|
Re: 2012 World Championship
« Reply #32 on: Jan 30th, 2012, 6:25pm » |
Quote Modify
|
me and harren have agreed to play 4 hours later than out time slot now selected
and omar, my local time is wrong, which is part of the reason why i was late to my game against adanac.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: 2012 World Championship
« Reply #33 on: Jan 30th, 2012, 7:41pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 30th, 2012, 6:25pm, Tuks wrote:me and harren have agreed to play 4 hours later than out time slot now selected
and omar, my local time is wrong, which is part of the reason why i was late to my game against adanac. |
|
Last year Omar instituted a new policy to save himself from having to manually change the times of many games: If the players want to agree to a time, they need to both select that time slot as their top preference so that the scheduler automatically assigns that time to their game.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
omar
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2
Gender:
Posts: 1003
|
|
Re: 2012 World Championship
« Reply #34 on: Jan 30th, 2012, 10:36pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 30th, 2012, 6:25pm, Tuks wrote:| me and harren have agreed to play 4 hours later than out time slot now selected |
|
Please select the time slot which you have agreed to play as your 1st preference with everything else being 2nd or 3rd preference.
Quote:
and omar, my local time is wrong, which is part of the reason why i was late to my game against adanac. |
|
Select 'Setting -- Time Zone' and change the value there and click the 'Refresh' link in the top right corner of the gameroom until the times look right.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: 2012 World Championship
« Reply #35 on: Feb 2nd, 2012, 12:26pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Silver has had a good tournament so far, going 11-4 over the first three rounds. I calculated the apparent Elo advantage of playing Silver, i.e. the number of rating points you would have to add to the rating of everyone playing Silver in order for an 11-4 record to be expected. I used game room ratings with hanzack artificially set to 2200, and the Silver advantage works out to be 192 rating points. If we set hanzack to 2400 rating, the effect is slightly less pronounced, since he has played Silver twice and Gold once, but it still comes out to a 181 Elo advantage for playing Silver.
Herein lies yet another cautionary tale about drawing inferences from a small data set!
|
| « Last Edit: Feb 2nd, 2012, 5:33pm by Fritzlein » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: 2012 World Championship
« Reply #36 on: Feb 3rd, 2012, 6:02am » |
Quote Modify
|
The rules say, "Recognition of second and third place will be done based on number of games won. Ties for second and third place will not be broken with additional games and all players that tied for these positions will be recognized." I would dislike the asymmetry of suddenly having to recognize four players in the roll of champions here, or even having to list two players tied for second-third. The "internal performance rating" gives an obvious second tie-breaker after the number of wins, because we are already calculating it for the purpose of pairings. Why not use that to prevent ties for second and third?
|
| « Last Edit: Feb 3rd, 2012, 6:03am by Fritzlein » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Nombril
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #4509
Gender:
Posts: 292
|
|
Re: 2012 World Championship
« Reply #37 on: Feb 3rd, 2012, 8:44pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I'm actually very confused why there is any discussion about the number of wins any where in the rules. I would not support it as a tie breaker. (Even though I'm currently ahead of C&G by that metric, since he had a bye !)
Number of wins will be different from others with the same number of losses only because of a difference in byes, right?
With the very small sample of games, I also don't see how performance rating really will be that accurate either.
If we want to differentiate, I would suggest that a tie breaker game be played - either as an official game or as a casual game... (Yes... I know one game isn't significant either - but that is the whole point of having a tournament - to decide rankings in a crucial game, under pressure, on the board - not by a mathematical calculation...)
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: 2012 World Championship
« Reply #38 on: Feb 3rd, 2012, 9:59pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Feb 3rd, 2012, 8:44pm, Nombril wrote:| If we want to differentiate, I would suggest that a tie breaker game be played[...] |
|
I also like the idea of tiebreaker games; my suggestion to use performance rating (after wins) to break ties was merely to say that we don't have to put up with ties even if for some reason we dislike playing extra games.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Sconibulus
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #4633
Gender:
Posts: 116
|
|
Re: 2012 World Championship
« Reply #39 on: Feb 3rd, 2012, 10:27pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I think the reason to avoid a tiebreaker game is to prevent the tournament from potentially dragging on an extra round. to differentiate between second and third. A lot of decisions this year seem to be focused on having fewer rounds to schedule.
Nombril, are you saying you'd want a 5-3 player to score the same as a 6-3 player if they both went out in round 9?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Nombril
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #4509
Gender:
Posts: 292
|
|
Re: 2012 World Championship
« Reply #40 on: Feb 3rd, 2012, 11:11pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Yes, it is triple elimination. 5-3 and 6-3 have both lost the same number of games. Wins having nothing to do with performance in this tournament structure.
If I understand correctly, bye's are more likely to go to a high seeded/ranked player ... so fewer wins means you have been rewarded a bye week for doing well. It seems crazy that at the end of the tournament we would "reward" the person who did better at the beginning of a tournament with a worse final result.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
mistre
Forum Guru
Gender:
Posts: 553
|
|
Re: 2012 World Championship
« Reply #41 on: Feb 4th, 2012, 8:57am » |
Quote Modify
|
Hmmm, as tournament director, I guess it is up to be to come up with a ruling on this. Is that correct Omar?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
aaaa
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #958
Posts: 768
|
|
Re: 2012 World Championship
« Reply #42 on: Feb 4th, 2012, 9:13am » |
Quote Modify
|
I was led to believe by Omar that there would no longer be any official recognition of runner-ups. That's what caused a problem when it was realized the screening games require a clear second place in the computer championship.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: 2012 World Championship
« Reply #43 on: Feb 4th, 2012, 11:48am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Feb 4th, 2012, 8:57am, mistre wrote:| Hmmm, as tournament director, I guess it is up to be to come up with a ruling on this. Is that correct Omar? |
|
I think the rules are reasonably clear as written. I'm mostly explaining why I don't like the rules as written, and what I think they should be changed to for next year, but I don't much care for changing rules mid-tournament, except in cases where the rules a having an unintended consequence that is generally agreed to be destructive.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: 2012 World Championship
« Reply #44 on: Feb 4th, 2012, 7:44pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 22nd, 2012, 1:26pm, chessandgo wrote:| doesn't that count inculde all people who have the game window open, even if they have hit "pause" because they listen to TS? |
|
I experimented and I couldn't get the number of listeners to go up and down by one when I paused and restarted at various intervals, so I conclude that you were right. We should only look at the number on radio; we will double-count if we add in TeamSpeak.
Anyway, we hit a tournament high of 35 radio listeners sometime during our game tonight. The record of 44 set in 2011 is looking within reach!
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Login
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print