Re: EGC 2010
Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 9:46 am
I just noticed that the weekend tournament started with a 32 player top group. Why such a huge group for only 5 rounds? 
Thanks, I didn't know that.pwaldron wrote:I'm not sure how things are done in Europe, but in the US there are two types of byes: forced and unforced. Forced byes happen when there are an odd number of players in the field and someone has to sit out. In that case the bye counts as a win (because that person would play if they could and shouldn't be disadvantaged). An unforced bye occurs when you want to take the round off. Unforced byes count as a loss.Kirby wrote:If you take a "bye" (skip out for a round), it's a double edged sword. On one hand, you don't get a loss, so your MMS can be the same as somebody that won that round.
To answer the previous question about how SOS is calculated for players involved in a bye, it is usual (in North America at least) to count the bye as a win/loss against a phantom player who starts off with the same initial score and who wins exactly half of his games. So for Thomas Debarre, it would be someone who was the same rank as Thomas and who has a current score of 2.5 out of five games.
Surely to get one unique winner from just that group?HermanHiddema wrote:I just noticed that the weekend tournament started with a 32 player top group. Why such a huge group for only 5 rounds?
HermanHiddema wrote:I just noticed that the weekend tournament started with a 32 player top group. Why such a huge group for only 5 rounds?
Or maybe it's a tribute to Essen Turnier in the 90's where they had 65 players in the top McMahon group for a 5-round tournament. The winner got the 1st place by SOS tie-breakerTMark wrote:Surely to get one unique winner from just that group?
It will give an unique winner (for the first place it will just act like an single elimination tournament)Vesa wrote:HermanHiddema wrote:I just noticed that the weekend tournament started with a 32 player top group. Why such a huge group for only 5 rounds?Or maybe it's a tribute to Essen Turnier in the 90's where they had 65 players in the top McMahon group for a 5-round tournament. The winner got the 1st place by SOS tie-breakerTMark wrote:Surely to get one unique winner from just that group?
Cheers,
Vesa
EGC 2010 TD 5D
I think there were games with players who were not in the top group. The top group is not isolated from the rest of the tournament, so this seems not unusual.willemien wrote:![]()
On http://www.egc2010.fi/results/egc-weekend-results.txt,
there are 6 players in the top group with 4 wins.
I am not sure what the reason is. Was the top group bigger than 32 players, or was there a pairing error?
Really? I thought the rating changes were taken as a batch by tournament? (so starting rating is used for all 3 games you play in a tournament as opposed to adjusted after each one)Mcgreag wrote:It doesn't really matter if they are counted as one or 2 whatever. Every game is still calculated separately and the calculation for game 2 is made based on change after game 1 etc. The only thing that makes a difference is that there are a limit to how many points you can lose in a single tournament.
Possibly for ranking to be calculated in the correct order, as main tournament is separated by weekend one.Vesa wrote:I don't understand the origin or the need for the habit to report this tournament as two separate tournaments.
With the sponsorship they had and the number of entrants I am extremely surprised they did not have prize money of EU20,000 or more. Then again I am not familiar with the economics of running such a tournament. But I am just suprised, how many people would it take to show up to have some really worthwhile prizes for the pros?HermanHiddema wrote:1000 euro for first place, 600 for 2nd place, 300 for 3rd place. That was both for the Open and for the European. Since four players shared the same number of points (for both titles), the price money was shared equally between them, 475 each.LovroKlc wrote:Just out of curiosity: What was the prize money of 2009 EGC?
See also the Dutch reaction on Romanian Proposals (attached PDF) at: http://gohub.eu/forums/1/topics/7