0 for loss, 1 for draw, 2.0001 for a win.

i propose 0 for loss, 1 for draw, 2.00001 for a win.

the current system of 0 for loss, 1 for draw, 3 for a win, seems to not recognise the great draws that happen in chess. It also encourages people to go for a timeout win in a drawn situation, which noone really likes. The current system also is not expected by long term chess players familiar with the 0:1:2 regime.

this is a small adjustment for russ too make but he needs to get it right ...

of course the traditional 0 for loss, 1 for draw, 2 for a win, is another option, but leads to too many drawn scenarios.

Originally posted by flexmore
i propose 0 for loss, 1 for draw, 2.00001 for a win.

eh? What are you talking about?

when was it 3 for a win???

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
when was it 3 for a win???

I think that he is referring to tournaments...

I still don't understand why 3 points for a win leads to more draws than 2.0001. Surely a draw happens when the points score is even?

Duel Tournament:
2 draws = 2 points. It's a draw
1 win and 1 loss = 3 points or 2.0001 points. Again still a draw.

Can anyone explain this to me?

Originally posted by Hindstein
I think that he is referring to tournaments...

I still don't understand why 3 points for a win leads to more draws than 2.0001. Surely a draw happens when the points score is even?

[b]Duel Tournament:
2 draws = 2 points. It's a draw
1 win and 1 loss = 3 points or 2.0001 points. Again still a draw.

Can anyone explain this to me?[/b]

my proposal would not have any impact on the duel tournament scenario ... the problem of draws there is inherently related to the tournament construction of groupsize 2.

it would affect all other tournaments with a larger group size.
currently 1 win (possibly by timeout) and 2 losses is the same as 3 draws ?!?!?