Go back
2010 Championship

2010 Championship

Tournaments

a

THORNINYOURSIDE

Joined
04 Sep 04
Moves
245624
Clock
09 Apr 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by SapanRinpoche
Reflecting back upon the first round of the 2010 Championship -- I fully enjoyed playing in it. However, the pairing system of "RANDOM," for such an event is an absolute disaster, and the powers that be, managing the pairings ought to go back to the drawing board and work out a better, actually conventional way, of preparing the pairings. There are so ...[text shortened]... a piece of cake! Kindest regards, Sapan Rinpoche - Lyons, Colorado, USA, North America
Its worked fine for the 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and now 2010 championships so why change it?

Its random pairing, everyone knows that when they enter.

Sometimes you get lucky, sometimes you don't.

Ponderable
chemist

Linkenheim

Joined
22 Apr 05
Moves
669861
Clock
10 Apr 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by SapanRinpoche
rant about pairing
In fact to reach round two might be nice for a weaker player (say 1500s) but he will lose nearly to all games there, so the profit of the excersice stays unclear to me.

And not meaning to be offensive: as a 1900 you stand a very slight chance to reach the finals and certainly none in those.

Farnaby
here and now, boys

Joined
26 Aug 08
Moves
43062
Clock
12 Apr 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

Changing the topic from the absurd pairings rant:

There are only 18 undecided groups remaining!

These are:

9, 10, 11, 27, 32, 36, 39, 47, 59, 60, 67, 72, 81, 83, 89, 94, 95, and 98.

a
win or go home

I'm right behind you

Joined
26 Dec 09
Moves
13689
Clock
13 Apr 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

Group 10 decided

a
win or go home

I'm right behind you

Joined
26 Dec 09
Moves
13689
Clock
13 Apr 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

SapanRipoche which group number you come from?

a
win or go home

I'm right behind you

Joined
26 Dec 09
Moves
13689
Clock
13 Apr 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by SapanRinpoche
Reflecting back upon the first round of the 2010 Championship -- I fully enjoyed playing in it. However, the pairing system of "RANDOM," for such an event is an absolute disaster, and the powers that be, managing the pairings ought to go back to the drawing board and work out a better, actually conventional way, of preparing the pairings. There are so ...[text shortened]... a piece of cake! Kindest regards, Sapan Rinpoche - Lyons, Colorado, USA, North America
I slightly disagree with SapanRipoche.... every player has some skills to be improved, let's give them chance to play tough games. At least some of them can make a try to look for each of these games more carefull and become really hard player to compete...

p
Highlander

SEAsia

Joined
24 Nov 08
Moves
9868
Clock
14 Apr 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by SapanRinpoche
There are so many players at 1600, 1500, etc. moving on in the first round that it makes for an actually RIDICULOUS, ABSURD "RHP CHAMPIONSHIP" tournament.
As a 1600 player I agree with you.

In my group I was the highest rated by some 300 points. To have such an easy group for an average club player like myself doesn't seem right for this sites flagship tourn.

Despite my best efforts to mess it up I've passed through to the next round. Did I deserve it? I don't think so.

a
win or go home

I'm right behind you

Joined
26 Dec 09
Moves
13689
Clock
14 Apr 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by peacedog
As a 1600 player I agree with you.

In my group I was the highest rated by some 300 points. To have such an easy group for an average club player like myself doesn't seem right for this sites flagship tourn.

Despite my best efforts to mess it up I've passed through to the next round. Did I deserve it? I don't think so.
I started my group when I was 1200p or smth - top seeded had 1700 approx..... despite everything I won it with 1666 points at the moment. Did I worth to play in the second round? I think I did )))

p
Highlander

SEAsia

Joined
24 Nov 08
Moves
9868
Clock
14 Apr 10
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by adriano81
I started my group when I was 1200p or smth - top seeded had 1700 approx..... despite everything I won it with 1666 points at the moment. Did I worth to play in the second round? I think I did )))
The point that I, and I guess SapanRinpoche is trying to make is that a 1600 player should only get through by playing well. Not by the luck of the draw. If its gonna be like that, why not skip the chess altogether and pull the tourny winners name out of a hat.

Not sure what you are saying about your rating jump during the tourn. A p1200 grade could mean you play like Karpov... ...or like a carp:-)

M

Joined
01 Oct 08
Moves
13897
Clock
15 Apr 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

I think random pairing is much more interesting, as it gives lower rated players a chance; and therefore encourages them to participate.

It is unfair, if by fair we mean that the better player should win and progress. But why is that "fair"? isn't it fair that everybody has a chance, regardless of their level? and why should a tournament reward the better? why should we be fair?

isn't it much more funny for a tournament to be unfair? actually it is the only interest for a tournament: to be unfair. We all know that we prefer tournaments which humiliate the better, and where the bad triumphs. a tournament is not about knowing who is better, (after all, we already know who is better, just see the rankings) it is about humiliating the one everybody knows to be the best.

a

THORNINYOURSIDE

Joined
04 Sep 04
Moves
245624
Clock
15 Apr 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by peacedog
The point that I, and I guess SapanRinpoche is trying to make is that a 1600 player should only get through by playing well. Not by the luck of the draw. If its gonna be like that, why not skip the chess altogether and pull the tourny winners name out of a hat.

Not sure what you are saying about your rating jump during the tourn. A p1200 grade could mean you play like Karpov... ...or like a carp:-)
Why bother with any games for the majority.

Just ask the top 2 to compete, after all surely one of the top 2 should be Champion?

p
Highlander

SEAsia

Joined
24 Nov 08
Moves
9868
Clock
15 Apr 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by adramforall
Why bother with any games for the majority.

Just ask the top 2 to compete, after all surely one of the top 2 should be Champion?
The way it is paired now, it was possible for the top 2 to meet in the first round. Infact the top 8 could of been in the same group. That is just stupid.

It's a bit like Anand and Topalov having a match to earn the right to play me for the World Championship:-)

M

Joined
01 Oct 08
Moves
13897
Clock
15 Apr 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

are you sure it is so stupid? why?

p
Highlander

SEAsia

Joined
24 Nov 08
Moves
9868
Clock
15 Apr 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Macpo
I think random pairing is much more interesting, as it gives lower rated players a chance; and therefore encourages them to participate.

It is unfair, if by fair we mean that the better player should win and progress. But why is that "fair"? isn't it fair that everybody has a chance, regardless of their level? and why should a tournament reward the better? ...[text shortened]... ter, just see the rankings) it is about humiliating the one everybody knows to be the best.
We all want the underdog to win a tourn like this. But where is the glory in sneaking past all the big guns just to get knocked out when you do meet them in the later rounds.

If the aim is to have a funny tourn they have gone down the right path. My first round group had a rating av less than a typical u1500 tourn. hahaha hohoho:-)

p
Highlander

SEAsia

Joined
24 Nov 08
Moves
9868
Clock
15 Apr 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Macpo
are you sure it is so stupid? why?
Hmm. I don't think that question deserves an answer.

Maybe have a look at any sporting event and have a think about it:-)

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.