Has the proposal of awarding points only for wins in tournaments even
been discussed? It would certainly lower the number of grandmaster
draws in tournaments and even if you draw in a hard fought game you
still get zero points as a point would only be given if you *defeat*
your opponent.

Comments?

So if both players play a perfect game of chess, they lose? For playing
perfectly? How do you figure?



"Karl Thoroddsen" wrote in message
om...
Has the proposal of awarding points only for wins in tournaments even
been discussed? It would certainly lower the number of grandmaster
draws in tournaments and even if you draw in a hard fought game you
still get zero points as a point would only be given if you *defeat*
your opponent.

Comments?

"Karl Thoroddsen" wrote in message
om...
Has the proposal of awarding points only for wins in tournaments even
been discussed? It would certainly lower the number of grandmaster
draws in tournaments and even if you draw in a hard fought game you
still get zero points as a point would only be given if you *defeat*
your opponent.

Comments?

Sooo if I manage to draw a game with kaspy in a tourny
I get nothing for it

Regards

I don't see the logic, a draw is just as bad as a lost game?
Maybe you're talking about matches between two players then there is
something to say for this, but as seen in the past when it often was this
way it didn't really avoid the draws. But the big advantage is that to win
the title you at least have to win some games and not just win 1 and draw 20
others.
For in tournaments a system 3 for win 1 for draw 0 for loss has some
advantages tough, but of course then you have the problem that some
fantastic games can also end in draw, but this can happen in football too
and there they also use this system.


"Karl Thoroddsen" schreef in bericht
om...
Has the proposal of awarding points only for wins in tournaments even
been discussed? It would certainly lower the number of grandmaster
draws in tournaments and even if you draw in a hard fought game you
still get zero points as a point would only be given if you *defeat*
your opponent.

Comments?


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.715 / Virus Database: 471 - Release Date: 4/07/2004

See the interesting interview with Anand on the chessbase web site about the
problem of short draws (and other issues) and what could be done about it.


"Karl Thoroddsen" wrote in message
om...
Has the proposal of awarding points only for wins in tournaments even
been discussed? It would certainly lower the number of grandmaster
draws in tournaments and even if you draw in a hard fought game you
still get zero points as a point would only be given if you *defeat*
your opponent.

Comments?

"Karl Thoroddsen" wrote:
.... Has the proposal of awarding points only for wins in tournaments
even
been discussed? ....

It's been discussed plenty, with pretty much the same results you're getting
here.

A better idea is to award prize money according to score, with an
exponential curve. For example, in a small ($20) four-round Swiss, you can
award:

$100 for 4-0
$50 for 3.5
$25 for 3-1
$10 for 2.5

-- so that each difference is greater than the difference below it.

For example, going into round 4, two players paired against each other at
3-0 will win a total of $100 if they draw, but $125 if they have a decisive
result.

This is a good way to discourage short draws, without messing with the
scoring system.

Bill Smythe

In article ,
(Karl Thoroddsen) wrote:

Has the proposal of awarding points only for wins in tournaments even
been discussed? It would certainly lower the number of grandmaster
draws in tournaments and even if you draw in a hard fought game you
still get zero points as a point would only be given if you *defeat*
your opponent.


YES, WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS APPROXIMATELY 183,000,000 TIMES!

It doesn't make sense from a game theoretic standpoint, since when you
really *have* a drawn position you would incent the players to, say,
flip a coin to see which one resigns. The expected value of the
coin-flip strategy is 0.5 points, while drawing has an expected value of
0 points. What would a smart player pick.

Anyway, do a google search of this group and "draws"

--Harold Buck


"I used to rock and roll all night,
and party every day.
Then it was every other day. . . ."
-Homer J. Simpson

In article ,
CeeBee wrote:

(Karl Thoroddsen) wrote in rec.games.chess.misc:

It would certainly lower the number of grandmaster
draws in tournaments

I fail to see that certainty.



GMs aren't stupid. They aren't going to agree to 0 points before the
game begins when they could play and have a shot at a point. But there
are other problems.

--Harold Buck


"I used to rock and roll all night,
and party every day.
Then it was every other day. . . ."
-Homer J. Simpson

"Harold Buck" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Karl Thoroddsen) wrote:

Has the proposal of awarding points only for wins in tournaments even
been discussed? It would certainly lower the number of grandmaster
draws in tournaments and even if you draw in a hard fought game you
still get zero points as a point would only be given if you *defeat*
your opponent.


YES, WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS APPROXIMATELY 183,000,000 TIMES!

SNIP

C'mon now, Harold, don't exaggerate. It hasn't been THAT much.

I think the number is actually more like 150,000,000 times.

Regards,

Matt

It's one point from a win and minus one point from a lose. That is the same
as getting zero from a lose and one from a draw and two from a win, that is
the same as getting zero from a draw, half a point from a draw and one point
from a win. They used to count only wins at older WC matches so that the
winning score couldn't be reached by making draws; they gave up of that when
Kasparov's WC match vs. Korchnoi lasted 48 games and it was still not at six
wins (Korchnoi had five points and Lasker had just won two games in a row to
make it 5-3).