From: Pieter Stouten <stoutepf <at> CARBON <dot> DMPC <dot> COM>
Date: 6 nov 1996
Subject: Re: Tournaments

Dear Alexander,

You raise an interesting problem with pairings and unwilling players.

>There were two players unhappy with the pairings sorted out by the computer
>program They had to play against each other. They voiced there
>discontentment,
> [...]
>My questions are:
>How do you deal with such a problem at your tournaments in your countries ?
>What solution do you have for such a problem ?
>
The issue here is that one simultaneously has to satisfy to conditions:

1) a fair, unbiased pairing according to criteria defined beforehand;
2) interesting games for all players involved.

People often travel far to tournaments in order to meet different opponents
than the ones they ordinarily play against. It is very unpleasant for them
having to play 1 game out of only 5 against e.g. their next door neighbour
(i.e., their regular opponent, member of their club, etc.). On the other
hand, one also needs to ensure that players with equal number of points
also have roughly the same sum of opponents' scores. What I have done in
the past is to accommodate players' wishes as much as possible by manually
fixing one or more pairings and letting the computer do the rest. Of
course, towards the end of the tournament if the players concerned are at
the very top or bottom of the table this becomes increasingly more
difficult. E.g. if in the last round of a tournament only two people have
zero points, they will have to play against each other. If you want the
computer to do the pairings without any human influence and if you do not
want to make any compromises to ensure that everybody has a good time, I
think it is important to make potential participants aware of that fact
well in advance. They can then decide not to participate or to participate
and accept the rules.

>declared one of the two as the winner and left the tournament without
>moving one piece on the board. They returned the next day for the next
>rounds.
> [...]
>What consequences do you suggest for such a behaviour ?
>My personal opinion is, that it is the privilege of each player to resign
>at any moment of the game, even at the beginning. In this case the
>opponent is winner. If the two player refuse to play each other and just
>go, both have lost the game. If a player just does not show up, he lost
>the game.
>
That is all debatable. If they declare one the winner, one might describe
this as one player resigning and the other accepting it. A possible
solution would be to require that colours be decided by furigoma and the
clock be started before the game is regarded begun. If the players do not
do that then they both lose. If they do decide colours and start the clock
then there will automatically be a (valid) result.

>Of course, such a behaviour is at the least bad manners and causes
>trouble for the other players and the tournament organisers.
>
I think that is the real issue. If it is necessary to implement rules as
described above then the damage has already been done and there is already
an unpleasant atmosphere. I guess the only thing that can be done short of
writing a set of rules that cover every contingency is to make players
aware of how the tournament is run so that they can decide for themselves
if that is acceptable to them or not.

Good luck, Pieter (ex-tournament organizer).

--

Pieter Stouten                             ||  Saying Windows 95 is equal
Computer Aided Drug Design Group           ||  to  Macintosh is like
The DuPont Merck Pharmaceutical Company    ||  finding a potato that
P.O. Box 80500, Wilmington, DE 19880-0500  ||  looks like Jesus and
Phone: +1 (302) 695 3515                   ||  believing you've witnessed
Fax: +1 (302) 695 9090                     ||  the second coming.
Internet: stoutepf <at> carbon <dot> dmpc <dot> com         ||           --
Web: http://www.halcyon.com/stouten/       ||      Guy Kawasaki