Re: Komi of Internet 13x13 Amateur World Go Championship
Posted: Thu Apr 16, 2015 8:15 am
I don't see why it is a problem that a 20k won the 1994 EGC 13x13 tournament?
If the handicaps are truly equalizing, then we would expect a 20k to have as much chance of winning it as a 7d, and we would see a 20k win the event roughly once every 30 years or so.
We would also see a representative sample of the playing population reach later rounds.
So, for example, if we look who qualified for the 2010 final 16 KO (http://www.egc2010.fi/results/13x13-finals.pdf), we can see that the handicap system was apparently very much to the advantage of the stronger players. Only one kyu player reached the last 16, and only one player weaker than 5 dan reached the last 8.
On the other hand, if we look at the 2014 results (http://www.egc2014.com/rezultate/1313.htm) we see that 6 kyu players, ranging from 2 kyu to 12 kyu, reached the last 16. So did 10 dan players, ranging from 2 dan to 6 dan. Since 3 qualified dan players failed to show up, sadly, only 7 dan players actually participated, which gave one of the kyu players two byes in a row, after which he won the tournament. In the last 8 it was 4 kyu players vs 3 dan players, in the last 4 it was 3 kyu and 1 dan player, and the final was 2 kyu players against each other.
I don't know what handicap system 2014 used, but the result was much closer to equalizing all players than 2010.
Now of course one can argue about whether one finds it desirable to truly equalize all the players or not, but if that is your set goal, then in 2010 the system clearly failed, and in 2014 the system got quite a reasonable result.
If the handicaps are truly equalizing, then we would expect a 20k to have as much chance of winning it as a 7d, and we would see a 20k win the event roughly once every 30 years or so.
We would also see a representative sample of the playing population reach later rounds.
So, for example, if we look who qualified for the 2010 final 16 KO (http://www.egc2010.fi/results/13x13-finals.pdf), we can see that the handicap system was apparently very much to the advantage of the stronger players. Only one kyu player reached the last 16, and only one player weaker than 5 dan reached the last 8.
On the other hand, if we look at the 2014 results (http://www.egc2014.com/rezultate/1313.htm) we see that 6 kyu players, ranging from 2 kyu to 12 kyu, reached the last 16. So did 10 dan players, ranging from 2 dan to 6 dan. Since 3 qualified dan players failed to show up, sadly, only 7 dan players actually participated, which gave one of the kyu players two byes in a row, after which he won the tournament. In the last 8 it was 4 kyu players vs 3 dan players, in the last 4 it was 3 kyu and 1 dan player, and the final was 2 kyu players against each other.
I don't know what handicap system 2014 used, but the result was much closer to equalizing all players than 2010.
Now of course one can argue about whether one finds it desirable to truly equalize all the players or not, but if that is your set goal, then in 2010 the system clearly failed, and in 2014 the system got quite a reasonable result.