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

Only Chess Forum

  1. Standard member chessisvanity
    THE BISHOP GOD
    28 Jan '08 20:49
    I was looking at my old tournaments and i noticed that people who got a "bye" got a full point? wtf?

    an example.....mike smith 1. W 2.L 3.W 4.W 5.X

    and they give him a 4.0?

    thats BS!!

    anyone know why this is?
  2. 28 Jan '08 20:54
    A one point bye is often given if there are an odd number of competitors in a Swiss tournament. Generally it is only people who are low on points that end up with such a bye.
  3. 28 Jan '08 20:55
    usually this happens only in swiss system tournaments...when the last player gets the bye...and the point...so anyway it does not matter for the topplaces....
  4. 28 Jan '08 20:57
    maybe in your case it was a swiss with too many rounds compared with the number of players...wrong implemented swiss...
  5. Standard member chessisvanity
    THE BISHOP GOD
    28 Jan '08 21:02
    the guy who got the bye was a provisional 1503?...why he was in the "under 1400" group beats me.
  6. 28 Jan '08 21:43 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by chessisvanity
    the guy who got the bye was a provisional 1503?...why he was in the "under 1400" group beats me.
    He's 1503 provisional so mabye his true strength is not 1500, because he has not completed 20 games.
  7. 29 Jan '08 02:15
    Originally posted by chessisvanity
    the guy who got the bye was a provisional 1503?...why he was in the "under 1400" group beats me.
    This may be because while his provisional rating was 1503- but his official supplement rating could be below 1400
  8. Standard member DoctorScribbles
    BWA Soldier
    29 Jan '08 02:31
    Originally posted by chessisvanity
    I was looking at my old tournaments and i noticed that people who got a "bye" got a full point? wtf?

    an example.....mike smith 1. W 2.L 3.W 4.W 5.X

    and they give him a 4.0?

    thats BS!!

    anyone know why this is?
    What score do you think he should get instead?
  9. Standard member chessisvanity
    THE BISHOP GOD
    29 Jan '08 02:36
    3.5 a bye being like a draw.
  10. Standard member DoctorScribbles
    BWA Soldier
    29 Jan '08 02:40 / 13 edits
    Originally posted by chessisvanity
    3.5 a bye being like a draw.
    Interesting. Why do you suppose Mr. Smith should be deprived of a perfect score if he won every game he played, only because he had no opponent in one round? Do you still think he should get only 1/2 if his would-be opponent who elected not to play was rated 400 points lower than Mr. Smith?

    As I see it, if you show up to the board and nobody beats you or plays you to a draw, you have won and are entitled to a full point.

    Additionally, I think players who elect to not play in a round should be given 0 points rather than the 1/2 that they are given. I've never understood the rationale behind this tradition.

    In what other realm of competition is a tie declared when one competitor simply chooses not to play a scheduled match? None that I know of, but that's precisely what you're calling for.

    It's really a matter of equity. If either opponent claims to have any equity in the full point that is at stake, it is his responsibility to arrive at the board and demonstrate it. If one fails to even attempt such a demonstration, I see no reason not to award the full point to the other player.
  11. Standard member chessisvanity
    THE BISHOP GOD
    29 Jan '08 02:43
    the way i see it....round 1 means anybody at the end of the rating spectrum should get this point.....not a god damn ringer who is now 1600...competing in a class he shouldnt be in....
  12. Standard member DoctorScribbles
    BWA Soldier
    29 Jan '08 02:48 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by chessisvanity
    the way i see it....round 1 means anybody at the end of the rating spectrum should get this point.....not a god damn ringer who is now 1600...competing in a class he shouldnt be in....
    It sounds to me like your beef is not with the system of awarding points for byes but rather with the eligibility requirements of competing in an Under section.
  13. Standard member chessisvanity
    THE BISHOP GOD
    29 Jan '08 03:36
    yes....provisional guys should be in a "provisional" group...
  14. 29 Jan '08 10:42
    This is the worst tournament I've ever seen for byes:
    http://www.uschess.org/msa/XtblMain.php?200711110231-12123950

    Paul Truong (AKA Mr Susan Polgar) was given two 1 point byes, allowing him to win the tournament with a perfect 5/5! He was White in all three of the games he actually played.
  15. Standard member chessisvanity
    THE BISHOP GOD
    29 Jan '08 12:27
    see what i mean guys!! this whole "bye" thing is a joke!!