From: Larry Kaufman WIZARD NET> Date: 2 jun 2000 Subject: Re: Tournament System - Knockdown or Swiss At 12:06 PM 6/2/00 -0400, you wrote: >Following is my personal comment to Larry Kaufman's criticism. >1) I agree to the announcement of the Shogi World Championship that Mr. >Egoshi is the champion and Mr. Ito is the runner up. There is no one >other than Mr. Chiaki Ito who can claim as No.2 in the tournament. I completely agree. But it was just lucky that he was not in the same half of the pairings as the winner Mr. Egoshi. >2) I truly believe that there are many reasons why many world class >tournaments in various games use knockdown system in stead of swiss in >the final championship series or tournaments. I agree here too. >3) USSF used exactly knockdown system in US Championship 1999 in >Chicago. The Champion was decided by the knockdown system. Larry Kaufman >is the chairman of USSF. >I like to hear the explanation from Larry Kaufman why he applied the >knockdown. Why didn't he criticize the system in his USA Championship >which indeed used the knockdown system. That event was organized and run primarily by Japanese players in Chicago. I have always favored the Swiss and opposed knockout, as do perhaps 90% of the non-Japanese players, but in this tournament the organizers were Japanese and wanted knockout. The USSF will still support, sanction, and rate knockout events; even if we Americans feel that it is not the best system, the events are still very exciting and enjoyable. >4) I like to point out the facts that many world top class tournaments >use knock down system. These tournaments are managed and operated by >first class people for many years and they must have good reasons for >their system. >World Cup (the largest sports event in the world) use knock down system >in the final championship tournament after using swiss system to select >top 8 (or 16) similar to the Shogi World Championship. That was my (and Pieter Stouten's) proposal! We proposed to use Swiss until top 4, then knockout. But if you wanted to change that to 8, that's okay. >I heard a lots of words from many countries that Italy (or England) was >very unfortunate to fight against Brazil at the first round of the >championship tournament. Otherwise Italy (England) could be the team to >go to the final 4. However, the World Cup dose not use swiss system even >after final four were determined. The team (Brazil) who lost >championship against France was very disappointed but they claimed to be >No2 and nobody raised question about the status of No.2 like Larry did >it to Ito. >No3 and No4 was decided but none of them complained that the system was >wrong and he could be No2. as he did not play against the No.2 like >Larry did. >I do not hear any strong voice that swiss system must be applied to the >final four of the world cup. >Can we say that in the most popular sports in the world, knockdown >system is well accepted to determine champion? If so there must be good >reasons. Knockout is indeed okay to determine champion, but very poor at determining #2, 3, 4 etc. For those positions everything depends on the luck of the draw. >Can you claim that Japanese like knockdown and Europeans like swiss? I >do not think so. It is pity to learn that many Shogi leaders outside of >Japan simplify the issues by drawing lines by Japanese vs Westerners. That is my experience. Japanese are generally not familiar with Swiss system, as it is not used much in Japan. Western shogi players are usually first chess players, and know the Swiss system well. It is generally recognized that the popularity of tournament chess in America and Europe is largely due to the Swiss system, and to the rating system. >5) How about olympic, the sacred of the world sports. >There are many games in olympic that use knockdown system rather than >swiss. Gold, Silver and Brons can stand on the ceremony with national >anthem. Yes, it is dramatic, and well suited for attracting spectators. But it has a much larger luck factor than does the Swiss system. >Many athletes have only one chance. If they lose on the first round of >qualifying tournament, many of them must fly back home in the midst of >Olympic. They trained very hard for 4 or longer years putting everything >in but are given only one chance in their life. This is the reality of >the Olympic and the world is excited every 4 years. I do not hear the >complain like Larry Kafuman raised. >Why is that? These are people who are devoting their whole lives to the sport. But for most amateur shogi players, they want to enjoy competing as much as possible, not to be eliminated from serious contention by one loss. I guess it comes down to whether we are aiming for maximum publicity or for maximum enjoyment by the players themselves. >7) In the United States of America where Larry Kaufman live in, Major >League Baseball, American Foot Ball and National Basket Ball, all of >them use knock down system to determine the Champion after the all year >long league or swiss system tournament. Again, this is okay with me. I don't mind a short knockout after a Swiss. >I do not hear many complains from the sports journalists against the >knockdown system for the championship tournaments. I think sports >journalist will write anything if they could get public attention. Why >is that? Again, the emphasis is on the spectators, not the players, since they are mostly pros, not amateurs. >I have not seen many articles in sports news questioning the status of >No.2 saying he did not play against one of the loser in semi final as >Larry Kaufman raised. Is this because of sportsman's spirit? >In these most popular sports in USA, I do not see many sports writers >claim that Swiss system must be applied instead of knockdown to >determine the world champion. > No, Swiss is not the best way to determine the champion. It is a good way to determine the 2,4, or 8 who fight for the championship, and a good way to determine placing of all the participants. > >There must be good and enough reasons why the sports world accept >knockdown system to determine the champion. I am sure they know well the >merit of Swiss system too. >It was not pleasant for me to read the criticism by Larry Kaufman >questioning the status of the runner up of the tournament in order to >convince swiss system to the shogi world championship. I did not question that Mr. Ito deserved his second place; I only pointed out that it could just as easily have been a weaker player who got it, if the drawing had been different. I don't like luck to play a big role in a tournament. >As mentioned the other day I understand the merit of swiss system and >the shogi world championship used the swiss system for the >classification tournament, however I am not convinced at all whether >swiss system must be used to determine the world champion. So we really only disagree as to how many rounds of Swiss to use before going to knockout!! >And I totally disagree to simplify the difference of opinion by Japanese >vs Westerners. That is a reality that is due to our past experiences; it is certainly not a criticism or anything to be upset about. Chess players grow up on the Swiss system, and Japanese (except Habu!) don't usually play chess. >Regards, >Shigeki Masui > One final remark; my preference for Swiss over knockout, or at least Swiss + short knockout, is not specifically related to your tournament. I just picked this occasion to emphasize my belief that for shogi tournaments in general, any knockout should be confined to the final rounds. No one should be eliminated from contention for some prize and from the main tournament by one early loss, even if first prize is no longer possible. That is my main point. I think we are really not so far apart in our thinking about this, Masui-san. Regards, Larry Kaufman