Life In 19x19

walpurgis wrote:KO = knockout tournament? Does that mean that if you're in the top 8 and lose on round 8, you can't become the champion? Or will they keep their MMS from previous rounds and continue as normal, just within their "mini-tournament"?

Yes, knock-out.

After round 7, there is a play-off first to determine the top 8, which goes like this:

Take the best 16 Europeans (MMS + SOS)

Pair 1 with 16, 2 with 15, 3 with 14, etc.

If one of the players in the pair has more MMS (after round 7), they qualify for the KO without playing.

If the players have the same MMS, they play a game on Wednesday. The winner qualifies for the KO.

Now we have exactly 8 players, who play direct knock-out in the last three rounds (Thu, Fri, Sat). So if you lose any of those three games, you are not European Champion, even if you had better MMS at the start of the KO.

A-ha, I see. Thanks for the information.

HermanHiddema wrote:

walpurgis wrote:KO = knockout tournament? Does that mean that if you're in the top 8 and lose on round 8, you can't become the champion? Or will they keep their MMS from previous rounds and continue as normal, just within their "mini-tournament"?

Yes, knock-out.

After round 7, there is a play-off first to determine the top 8, which goes like this:

Take the best 16 Europeans (MMS + SOS)

Pair 1 with 16, 2 with 15, 3 with 14, etc.

If one of the players in the pair has more MMS (after round 7), they qualify for the KO without playing.

If the players have the same MMS, they play a game on Wednesday. The winner qualifies for the KO.

Now we have exactly 8 players, who play direct knock-out in the last three rounds (Thu, Fri, Sat). So if you lose any of those three games, you are not European Champion, even if you had better MMS at the start of the KO.

That seems very unfair. The winner should be the one with the best performance over the entire tournament.

DrStraw wrote:That seems very unfair. The winner should be the one with the best performance over the entire tournament.

I wholeheartedly agree, though I think a fair fairer thing would be a 3-4 game league with the best 4 or best 8. Too long to work, but it would make it clearer for who is "the best."

The KO league method is used in many sports, though (the first example for me would be the Spanish first division basketball championship.)

RBerenguel wrote:

DrStraw wrote:That seems very unfair. The winner should be the one with the best performance over the entire tournament.

I wholeheartedly agree, though I think a fair fairer thing would be a 3-4 game league with the best 4 or best 8. Too long to work, but it would make it clearer for who is "the best."

The KO league method is used in many sports, though (the first example for me would be the Spanish first division basketball championship.)

Which is an excellent reason NOT to use it for go, or any other mental pursuit.

DrStraw wrote:

RBerenguel wrote:

DrStraw wrote:That seems very unfair. The winner should be the one with the best performance over the entire tournament.

I wholeheartedly agree, though I think a fair fairer thing would be a 3-4 game league with the best 4 or best 8. Too long to work, but it would make it clearer for who is "the best."

The KO league method is used in many sports, though (the first example for me would be the Spanish first division basketball championship.)

Which is an excellent reason NOT to use it for go, or any other mental pursuit.

I don't think that the fact that it is used in many sports makes it unreasonable for go. There are of course arguments for and against, but this fact alone should not be one of them.

DrStraw wrote:That seems very unfair. The winner should be the one with the best performance over the entire tournament.

Well, you can probably find a score of older threads about it, but here's a quick summary:

This system was introduced because in many recent years the EC was decided on SOS or even SODOS. And the reason for that was that many strong Asian players (especially Korean 7d amateurs) participated and took all the top places in the McMahon. So the EC was mostly decided by: which round did you get paired against the Koreans? (early round? bad for SOS, no EC for you).

So then there was talk of: Maybe we should only pair the European top players against each other. Never pair Asian players against the top 16/24/32 European. That is what they did in Hamburg in 88, and as a result all the strong Japanese visitors spent two weeks playing other Japanese. Not much fun, not very welcoming of us, people felt.

So this system is a sort of compromise. You have to do good enough in the first 7 rounds to make the cut, and after that it is just Europeans amongst themselves.

Is it perfect? No, but a lot of systems are not. It is good enough.

HermanHiddema wrote:Now we have exactly 8 players, who play direct knock-out in the last three rounds (Thu, Fri, Sat). So if you lose any of those three games, you are not European Champion, even if you had better MMS at the start of the KO.

I think this sounds quite exciting, and although I understand what's unfair about the possibility that the most consistent player might not end up becoming the European Champion, the winner will have nonetheless been the only player with no losses in the KO round. All three games and especially the final, will be played against the top players in what is surely the atmosphere of a pressure cooker. The winner certainly deserves the title.

daal wrote:I think this sounds quite exciting, and although I understand what's unfair about the possibility that the most consistent player might not end up becoming the European Champion, the winner will have nonetheless been the only player with no losses in the KO round. All three games and especially the final, will be played against the top players in what is surely the atmosphere of a pressure cooker. The winner certainly deserves the title.

One of the advantages of the system is that it is much easier to explain at the end.

Under the old system, you could have a last round situation like: These 7 players can still win the EC, provided they win this round, but who wins then also depends on the results of 30 other players, some of whom may be playing on board 50 or so.

Try telling that to a passing journalist

HermanHiddema wrote:

DrStraw wrote:That seems very unfair. The winner should be the one with the best performance over the entire tournament.

Well, you can probably find a score of older threads about it, but here's a quick summary:

This system was introduced because in many recent years the EC was decided on SOS or even SODOS. And the reason for that was that many strong Asian players (especially Korean 7d amateurs) participated and took all the top places in the McMahon. So the EC was mostly decided by: which round did you get paired against the Koreans? (early round? bad for SOS, no EC for you).

So then there was talk of: Maybe we should only pair the European top players against each other. Never pair Asian players against the top 16/24/32 European. That is what they did in Hamburg in 88, and as a result all the strong Japanese visitors spent two weeks playing other Japanese. Not much fun, not very welcoming of us, people felt.

So this system is a sort of compromise. You have to do good enough in the first 7 rounds to make the cut, and after that it is just Europeans amongst themselves.

Is it perfect? No, but a lot of systems are not. It is good enough.

Well, it still seems unfair to me. Why not take those 8 players and following the KO process but maintain the MMS, SOS and SODOS scores already earned?

DrStraw wrote:Well, it still seems unfair to me. Why not take those 8 players and following the KO process but maintain the MMS, SOS and SODOS scores already earned?

Because the specific goal of the system is to avoid draws and decisions on SOS/SODOS, so that would break the system.

It seems unfair because it is somewhat unfair. Not terribly so, but it isn't perfect by any means.

HermanHiddema wrote:Well, you can probably find a score of older threads about it, but here's a quick summary:
...

Thanks for such a succinct summary. I think I read many of those older threads, but I still didn't understand the point.

jts wrote:

HermanHiddema wrote:Well, you can probably find a score of older threads about it, but here's a quick summary:
...

Thanks for such a succinct summary. I think I read many of those older threads, but I still didn't understand the point.

I think his point is that the EGC is trying to make life fair when everyone knows it is not.

DrStraw wrote:

jts wrote:

HermanHiddema wrote:Well, you can probably find a score of older threads about it, but here's a quick summary:
...

Thanks for such a succinct summary. I think I read many of those older threads, but I still didn't understand the point.

I think his point is that the EGC is trying to make life fair when everyone knows it is not.

Well, no tournament design is inherently bad or good. They all give out a big shiny medal at the end. We can only say that each tournament design is best-suited to the needs of some tournaments, and a bad fit for others. A tournament where the best players are generally not eligible to win is pretty much the worst-case for Swiss, is it not?

Round 7 results: http://egc2013.go.art.pl/EGC2013_main.html

Here's the current top 16:

1. Fan Hui ================== 7W/0L | MMS 41 | SOS 272
2. Antti Tormanen =========== 6W/1L | MMS 40 | SOS 270
3. Thomas Debarre =========== 5W/2L | MMS 39 | SOS 273
4. Pavol Lisy ================ 5W/2L | MMS 39 | SOS 271
5. Ilya Shikshin ============== 5W/2L | MMS 39 | SOS 270
6. Mateusz Surma ============ 5W/2L | MMS 39 | SOS 270
7. Kachanovskyi Artem ======== 5W/2L | MMS 39 | SOS 268
8. Kravets Andrii ============= 5W/2L | MMS 39 | SOS 267
9. Dusan Mitic =============== 5W/2L | MMS 39 | SOS 267
10. Dinerchtein Alexandr ======= 5W/2L | MMS 39 | SOS 265
11. Kraemer Lukas ============ 4W/3L | MMS 38 | SOS 267
12. Campagnie Remi ========== 4W/3L | MMS 38 | SOS 266
13. Kuronen Juri ============== 4W/3L | MMS 38 | SOS 265
14. Lin Viktor ================ 4W/3L | MMS 38 | SOS 265
15. Podpera Lukas ============ 4W/3L | MMS 38 | SOS 265
16. Spiegel Lothar ============ 5W/2L | MMS 38 | SOS 265

If I understood correctly from earlier in the thread, top 6 automatically qualify for championship rounds (eliminating spots 11-16 due to higher MMS), while the 2 remaining spots will be decided on Wednesday by the outcomes of Artem Kachanovskyi vs Alexandr Dinerchtein and Andrii Kravets vs Dusan Mitic.