Potential European champion paradox

HermanHiddema · **#21**

Well, you might at least look at the results after round 10, instead of round 9:

http://www.egc2012.eu/congress/main-tou ... 10-results

In this list, Shikshin is 3rd, Simara is 5th (and they are 1st and 2nd European) Shikshin has 1 win more, but of course Simara's extra game win on Wednesday is not included

Also, at the main page for the main tournament:

http://www.egc2012.eu/congress/tourname ... ampionship

There is a knock-out table for the European Championship.

Also, the front page has a news item that Simara is champion.

hyperpape · **#22**

I copied and pasted the old link, without paying attention to it. As for what happened when I looked at the Congress website, I have no idea how I botched that. Thank you for a rather patient response.

topazg · **#23**

hyperpape wrote:

You can always specify some sufficiently gerrymandered achievement that a tournament is designed to recognize, and by that criterion, the tournament will always be a pretty good design. My point of view is that there are some general constraints on how a tournament should select a winner, and there's room for debate among those, but that this tournament doesn't do an especially good job of meeting them.

You look at the event, and it looks like a nine round McMahon tournament is its centerpiece. They're playing for nine days with some breaks in between.

Fun test: go to the webpage, look under congress > main tournaments, and try to find some indication that the European knockout even exists. You'll find a big fat table for a McMahon tournament at (http://www.egc2012.eu/congress/main-tournaments/open-european-championship/results-main-tournament-round-9). This seems to have been very dumb of me.

Anyway, the tournament had the rules that it had, Simara is the winner, but I think there's tons of room to criticize those rules.

I'll be honest, my points are mostly pedantic, maybe I just had a bad day

I happen to agree with you that I find it very dissatisfactory as a way of resolving the tournament, but I wouldn't call it wrong or unjust because I don't see any way how justice or right-ness applies beyond that of an application of the rules. The rules were well known by all at the beginning I suspect.

I'd love to see the champion title being given to the highest placed European in the main tournament, but as that got rejected out as a way of doing it within the last 24-36 months, I can't see it coming back any time soon sadly.

Potential European champion paradox

Who is online