Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Help Forum

Help Forum

  1. Standard member Toe
    14 Jul '04 11:15 / 1 edit
    This is a 'move' of a thread I started in the Tourney forum, but the number of posts there is so low I suspect very few folk are going there and its more appropriate for here anyway, so here's a copy of the thread:

    ------------------------------

    Me: See the diana grouped random (10th july now, started 26th march)
    Still on round one as there are two ongoing games, but significantly, the results of these games are irrelevant: the groups have already been won.

    In grouped tourneys, why not allocate group winners when the points make them winners, not 'all games have been played in group'?

    The next round could then start when all groups have winners (or possibly, all group winners have finished their group games).

    The delay in starting the next round as currently observed seems to serve no purpose.

    ------------------------------

    EXY: I would like to see this happen too. No point hanging on if the games outstanding have no baring on the second round.

    -----------------------------

    SirLoseALot: Excellent idea!

    -----------------------------
    Me again: See also Vulcan Grouped Random
    13 games in round one to go: none effects the group winner outcomes. That's a good month right there.
  2. Subscriber Russ
    RHP Code Monkey
    14 Jul '04 15:56
    Originally posted by Toe
    This is a 'move' of a thread I started in the Tourney forum, but the number of posts there is so low I suspect very few folk are going there and its more appropriate for here anyway, so here's a copy of the thread:

    ------------------------------

    Me: See the diana grouped random (10th july now, started 26th march)
    Still on round one as there are two o ...[text shortened]... es in round one to go: none effects the group winner outcomes. That's a good month right there.
    I'm hearing what you are saying - it does make a lot of sense.

    I will need to load up with coffee and send the family away for a week before I tackle that one though...

    -Russ
  3. Standard member Toe
    14 Jul '04 16:43
    Originally posted by Russ
    I'm hearing what you are saying - it does make a lot of sense.

    I will need to load up with coffee and send the family away for a week before I tackle that one though...

    -Russ
    Top show!
  4. 14 Jul '04 17:47
    Originally posted by Russ
    I'm hearing what you are saying - it does make a lot of sense.

    I will need to load up with coffee and send the family away for a week before I tackle that one though...

    -Russ
    While the exact algorithm is indeed quite complicated, you can use a simple one that does not take into account that when one person wins, the other loses. So, if the current leader already (he/she doesn't have to have all games completed) has more points than any other player in the group can possibly get, he/she is the winner. If all groups have a winner, the next round can start.
    Another thing that would greatly help is the automatic starting of tournaments (when it is full) and new rounds (when all games have been played/all groups have winners).
  5. 14 Jul '04 23:52
    Originally posted by piderman
    While the exact algorithm is indeed quite complicated, you can use a simple one that does not take into account that when one person wins, the other loses. So, if the current leader already (he/she doesn't have to have all games completed) has more points than any other player in the group can possibly get, he/she is the winner. If all groups have a winner ...[text shortened]... ents (when it is full) and new rounds (when all games have been played/all groups have winners).
    Well, what Russ once said made alot of sense, he doesn't start them over the weekends as alot of people don't have internet acces during that time, he always starts them monday, first thing in the morning, if I'm correct.

    O.
  6. Subscriber Russ
    RHP Code Monkey
    15 Jul '04 08:03 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by LivingLegend
    Well, what Russ once said made alot of sense, he doesn't start them over the weekends as alot of people don't have internet acces during that time, he always starts them monday, first thing in the morning, if I'm correct.

    O.
    I will only start them at the weekend if they are not too time sensitive (timeout period). I do tend to start them in the morning (GMT) too, because that is when the machine is least loaded.

    -Russ
  7. 15 Jul '04 08:49
    Ah, I didn't know that. It does indeed make sense.
    Still, there is something to say for the automatic starting. I have seen tournaments that were full and ready to start, but people would leave them again, so the wait was even longer. It can be pretty annoying.
  8. 15 Jul '04 16:27
    Actually, I understand Russ's desire to not have them start automatically. I can live with the couple day delay on the start if the winners are decided when they clinch the group victory as opposed to waiting for all the game to complete.

    One idea for starting the non-first round of any tournament. Have all timeouts start counting 48 hours after the start of a tournament. This gives people time to check their email and check the site without touching their timeout, much less their time bank. I don't know if this is a good idea, but it might allow Russ to start things on the weekend when volume is also low.
  9. 16 Jul '04 17:13
    Originally posted by Pie1120
    Actually, I understand Russ's desire to not have them start automatically. I can live with the couple day delay on the start if the winners are decided when they clinch the group victory as opposed to waiting for all the game to complete.

    One idea for starting the non-first round of any tournament. Have all timeouts start counting 48 hours after the st ...[text shortened]... is a good idea, but it might allow Russ to start things on the weekend when volume is also low.
    Or perhaps, for all games, a person's clock shouldn't start until either he/she has made at least one move in that game OR a longish initial move timeout period (say 5 days or something) has expired
  10. Standard member Toe
    26 Jul '04 10:06
    Originally posted by Toe
    ...see the diana grouped random (10th july now, started 26th march)...
    bump... (sorry Russ: we can all see you've been doing a lot on Uchess of late, but lest one forget...)

    Update: down to one game some 16 days later. Alas one of the remaining participants appears to have gone on holiday (not that the game's outcome is in any doubt). Fingers crossed he has net access from the beach!