Hopefuly the pairings are now fixed, and pairing byes give one full point.
Thanks for testing!
Thanks for testing!
@Molurus "If you apply this, you can always have an N round swiss tournament with N+1 players. (Which of course would, effectively, be a round robin tournament.)" No, you can't! You can't have a swiss tournament where there are 90 participants with 89 rounds. I think you misunderstood the pairing criteria.
Players are divided into groups according to their points, the so-called score brackets. All players with 5 points come in a group, all players with 6 points come in a group, etc. If a player gets a point without playing because, for example, his opponent did not appear for the game, the player comes in the next group. But this next group is no longer the same, because a player has been added. And in the next draw, that player who is new to the group must not be free to play. All players who are new to a score bracket should be paired together, so that players with the same score can play against each other. That's how I understand it! However, it is not possible to play a Swiss tournament where you have one less round than players. You misunderstood something.
If a game was decided because no game was played, it is possible to pair these two players again. But this is only possible in the following round. It's just an option. You don't have to do it.
This refers to this post:
lichess.org/forum/lichess-feedback/swiss-tournaments-are-on-lichess?page=16#156
P.S.
Another point is that you can then make a round robin tournament right away. And that's not appropriate for so many players. That's what the Swiss system is for! That's the advantage of the Swiss system. With this system you can make tournaments with very many participants and a comparatively small number of rounds.
Players are divided into groups according to their points, the so-called score brackets. All players with 5 points come in a group, all players with 6 points come in a group, etc. If a player gets a point without playing because, for example, his opponent did not appear for the game, the player comes in the next group. But this next group is no longer the same, because a player has been added. And in the next draw, that player who is new to the group must not be free to play. All players who are new to a score bracket should be paired together, so that players with the same score can play against each other. That's how I understand it! However, it is not possible to play a Swiss tournament where you have one less round than players. You misunderstood something.
If a game was decided because no game was played, it is possible to pair these two players again. But this is only possible in the following round. It's just an option. You don't have to do it.
This refers to this post:
lichess.org/forum/lichess-feedback/swiss-tournaments-are-on-lichess?page=16#156
P.S.
Another point is that you can then make a round robin tournament right away. And that's not appropriate for so many players. That's what the Swiss system is for! That's the advantage of the Swiss system. With this system you can make tournaments with very many participants and a comparatively small number of rounds.
#162 Of course it is possible. In a Swiss system, there are unique pairings, where they try to pair you with someone in the nearest points group. If there are multiple people in one group who haven't played each other, the top half plays the bottom half. But that doesn't make it impossible to have a round 22 where someone at 21 points gets paired with someone at 14 points. That just means he is the most close at that time. That is also possible in the programs recommended by the Dutch chess federation, FYI.
I understand it is ideal that at the last round the top 2 players battle it out for the trophy, but that is by no means required.
Another thing, I find it very hard to discuss with someone who only believe in their own stories and try to back that up with a lot of exclamation marks. We are better than that.
I understand it is ideal that at the last round the top 2 players battle it out for the trophy, but that is by no means required.
Another thing, I find it very hard to discuss with someone who only believe in their own stories and try to back that up with a lot of exclamation marks. We are better than that.
@TacticalBert
It is played only in the first round in such a way that the upper half plays against the lower half. The rest of the rounds are played according to the number of points. I also realize that not always players with the same number of points can play against each other. But this point difference should be as small as possible. A half to a whole point is probably still within the scope. But playing a Swiss tournament, for example, where there are 50 rounds with 51 participants, is just ridiculous! From a technical point of view alone, this is impracticable!
Edit: points = score, for a better understanding!
It is played only in the first round in such a way that the upper half plays against the lower half. The rest of the rounds are played according to the number of points. I also realize that not always players with the same number of points can play against each other. But this point difference should be as small as possible. A half to a whole point is probably still within the scope. But playing a Swiss tournament, for example, where there are 50 rounds with 51 participants, is just ridiculous! From a technical point of view alone, this is impracticable!
Edit: points = score, for a better understanding!
@TacticalBert See also #162
"Another point is that you can then make a round robin tournament right away. And that's not appropriate for so many players. That's what the Swiss system is for! That's the advantage of the Swiss system. With this system you can make tournaments with very many participants and a comparatively small number of rounds."
"Another point is that you can then make a round robin tournament right away. And that's not appropriate for so many players. That's what the Swiss system is for! That's the advantage of the Swiss system. With this system you can make tournaments with very many participants and a comparatively small number of rounds."
Great job @thibault
+1 on bye being 1 point (if I am leading tourn and then just by number of players, get a bye, not sure why I should lose a half point); that is for a non-pairing bye - late joiners can expect 0.5 or even 0.
One future feature request (only matters for large swiss, where you don't want strong players only meeting each other in last rounds after beating up weak players first few rounds) is option to make the tourn use accelerated pairings.
+1 on bye being 1 point (if I am leading tourn and then just by number of players, get a bye, not sure why I should lose a half point); that is for a non-pairing bye - late joiners can expect 0.5 or even 0.
One future feature request (only matters for large swiss, where you don't want strong players only meeting each other in last rounds after beating up weak players first few rounds) is option to make the tourn use accelerated pairings.
That would be nice too!
The reference for pairing systems is always the FIDE Handbook : handbook.fide.com
I know that and I didn't say anything else.
@thibault : I just tried to create an unrated Swiss tournament for my club, but it jumps back to "rated" upon saving.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.