From: Larry Kaufman <lkaufman <at> WIZARD <dot> NET>
Date: 22 may 1999
Subject: Re: Still Problems with the US Shogi Championship

-----Original Message-----
From: 'Ben Bednarz' <BenFB <at> AOL <dot> COM>
To: SHOGI-L <at> techunix <dot> technion <dot> ac <dot> il <SHOGI-L <at> techunix <dot> technion <dot> ac <dot> il>
Date: Friday, May 21, 1999 3:01 PM
Subject: Re: Still Problems with the US Shogi Championship


>Larry Kaufman wrote:
><<      I disagree that handicap games don't belong in a serious event.
They
> don't belong in an event in which a substantial prize such as a trip to
> Japan is being awarded, but they certainly do belong in events with
nominal
> prizes (say up to $100 or so in value).  The point is that in tourneys
with
>  >>
>
>Again, I'd like to take Larry's comment further: I think handicap is good
for
>ANY tournament in which you have a wide disparity of strength.  The US
Chess
>championship doesn't require handicap (assuming would could invent a good
>chess handicap system) because the players are all more or less comparable.
>They're supposed to be able to compete on even ground.  For the US Shogi
>championship, it sounds like we had a wide range of player strengths, so
>handicap makes more sense.  In terms of ratings, if you have players spread
>over 300 or more points, then you probably should require handicapping.
>
>On the other hand, once you use an accurate handicap system, you no longer
>need class prizes.  At that point, we are all equal; that's the purpose of
>the handicap.  In chess, we are forced to use class prizes because we have
no
>handicap system.
>
>A key point here is that the handicapping has to be accurate, which means
the
>ratings must be accurate.  Since, US Shogi is so new, it sounds like the
>rating are not quite firm.  They will never be completely firm - there are
>always people who are new or young or out-of-practice or sick or whatever -
>but as the rating system comes into more common use in this country, it
>should become more accurate, which will help with handicaps.
>
>Bottom line: a broach rating spectrum should be the deciding factor in
using
>handicap, not the size of the prize.  Otherwise, why not just hand the
prize
>to the highest rated player before the tournament starts, and then tell him
>to go home so the rest of us can have fun?

     No one is more in favor of handicap play than I am, but I don't like to
see substantial prizes awarded on any basis that rewards having a lower
rating.  This is the terrible situation in U.S. Chess, where thousands of
players deliberately lose games in minor events in order to win more money
in major ones.  This was the first tournament ever held in the U.S. (or
perhaps anywhere??) where a substantial prize (trip to Japan) was awarded on
such a basis, and I hope it will be the last.  As to giving the prize to the
highest rated player, it seems that you miss the point that several players
may be strong enough to have a reasonable chance at first place; the others
should be there because they love to play shogi, not because they hope to
win a valuable prize by misrepresenting their true strength.

     One solution would be to hold the event as a handicap tournament, with
a certain maximum rating used for handicap purposes.  Any player entering
with a lower rating than this maximum would be ineligible for the grand
prize, but would be eligible for trophies or prizes of modest cash value.

     Sincerely, Larry Kaufman