- Joined
- 10 Apr 03
- Moves
- 48786
21 Feb 14
Any chance the scoring could be 2 points for a win, 1 point for a draw?
While three points for a win is an incentive to play for a win, it is also an incentive for two players to agree to each resign one game rather than agree to two draws when both games between them are heading for a draw.
In the above scenario both players walk away with three (3) points for their win/loss rather than two (2) points for their draw/draw.
21 Feb 14
Originally posted by Phillidor284lol, I would make sure my opponent resign one game first. 😉
Any chance the scoring could be 2 points for a win, 1 point for a draw?
While three points for a win is an incentive to play for a win, it is also an incentive for two players to agree to each resign one game rather than agree to two draws when both games between them are heading for a draw.
In the above scenario both players walk away with three (3) points for their win/loss rather than two (2) points for their draw/draw.
07 Mar 14
Originally posted by Phillidor284This is quite correct. The incentives are indeed 'corrupting'. I freely admit that, in past Championships (ie the only two I've entered), I've agreed deals for two draws by 'winning' one and 'losing' the other. An element of trust is required. But it's not great. And I'm not the only one to recognise this flaw in the 3-1-0 model
Any chance the scoring could be 2 points for a win, 1 point for a draw?
While three points for a win is an incentive to play for a win, it is also an incentive for two players to agree to each resign one game rather than agree to two draws when both games between them are heading for a draw.
In the above scenario both players walk away with three (3) points for their win/loss rather than two (2) points for their draw/draw.
09 May 14
Originally posted by Ponderable217 entrees in less then 24 Hrs. So far.
The tournament is open now
For future reference:
Tournament 19582