Possible Unfairness/Controversy in Day 5 Matchups of NAC4
- This topic has 13 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 1 year, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I want to point out something about the matchups for Day 5 of a tournament.
While the production of the event has been top-notch, I noticed that player Vinchester was upset and questioning why a particular player wasn’t matched up with another player instead.
In the Swiss system, it’s best to have players with similar records play each other without repeating opponents, and the total win difference (TWD) between two opponents should be as close to 0 as possible.
The matchups for Day 5 (Scenario A) seem fair, but another scenario (Scenario B) could have been more objective with a lower TWD.
In Scenario B, there are no repeating matchups, and the TWD is two lower.
I understand that there may be some benefits to certain players in both scenarios, and I didn’t analyze the Buchholz points for all players.
Looking at the table, damn Villese has had a rough ride the last four days playing Viper, Hera, Yo, and Lierrey.
It’s amazing that he has managed to pull off two wins out of these matchups.
With viper being in the hospital the whole night a lot will change.
All we can do is waiting for an update from /u/Tsu_NilPferD
Its exactly what I said in another post I created, when the whole thing started.
I am pretty educated regarding different swiss systems.
As Nili mentioned the system he uses is a totally random swiss system.
It is something I dont really like.
However you have to respect the decisions.
If you are a player you should read rules if you dont understand them and ask the organizers to clarify them.
I read the section of the swiss system and actually nothing is mentioned there at all.
So it seems like the players were alright with whatever happens in a system only being summed up by SWISS SYSTEM (there are a lot out there)
​
I have several systems running on my PC with the NAC4.
and after round1 neither of the systems I use would have those matchups.
I had to make crazy restrictions to make it happen.
​
now this situation appears, yeah, shit happens but “crying” after you are in a situation you could ve prevented with some interest in the rules.
Shit happens
Back when I played chess competitively I participated in many Swiss system tournaments that produced screwy “unfair” matchups.
I never really understood the matchmaking other than the general concepts.
Apparently neither do tournament organizers as this has created controversy in professional chess as well.
Isn’t the total win difference for the current day 5 matches 6? 1+1+1+1+2
Nili mentioned at the end of today’s stream that they would be announcing the final schedule at the beginning of day five, so if this is an issue they will probably be addressing it then.
I think TWD metric is also not ideal.
At first, it makes no difference between win difference for a pair at the top and at the bottom.
So, it could affect a top match up in order to make it more fair for a bottom match up (for chess this is even more critical as there is usually no playoffs and a number of players is typically bigger).
I think fairness at the top should be prioritised.
At second, TWD allows one matchup to be very unfair while others are fair.
It will treat it as a better solution than all match ups a bit unfair (sum of win difference squares might be better to resolve this).
In general, I think each approach has weaknesses and it is possible to find a case where it could be done more fairly.
But it’s fine, the tourney is great.
The format is great.
Nobody is out early and at the same time group placement is important.
And there is a chance for an epic comeback from someone from the bottom.
Nili BigHead.
I don’t understand why you’re trying to minimize total win difference.
In most Swiss systems, competitors are simply ordered and then paired.
In this case, the order is based on record and Bucholz score.
I’m assuming the pairing is done to avoid repeats and minimize the total “distance” between competitors.
The proposed schedule does a better job minimizing that distance than your proposed schedule.
Wow, I also looked at this after the stream.
Got same results regarding matchups.
However your conclusion regarding who benefits are not that simple.
In scenario A, Vinchester can win 3 0 and still not get through if jordan wins his match due to buchholz score.
In scenario B Vinchester would get through as long as he wins his match no matter score.
I would understand if Vinchester would prefer scenario B to simply own his own fate, and maybe he thought it would be possible to matchup Vinch against nicov while jordan is matched up against ACCM, however this is not possible.
But this seems to not matter anymore as Viper is most likely not playing today due to the hospital visit.
It’s made up controversy.
Lierry vs Viper is a reasonable second match to pick after Hera vs TaToh ..
so it makes sense.
There’s no controversy here!
Just people who don’t understand the Swiss system! (OP uses total win difference to pick matchups but NAC4 uses bucholtz score to pick matchups)
Edit: Matchup were always made from top down with the use of the bucholtz score.
Villese got “hard” opponents because he did well in his games.
The system pairs you up with harder opponents when you win games and weaker opponents when you lose games.
But I do think that there are valid concerns about the system itself being lacking in picking the top 8 players in just 5 rounds among 10 players. (Which to me is not as controversial as OP seems to suggest)
Does anyone know when was the last time that Viper and Yo both lost more games than they won in a tournament?
Seems Viper especially is off his form, losing two separate matches 0-3.
Maybe controversial here but it doesn’t matter to me.
It’s a tournament and of you can’t beat whoever your matched with then your done no matter who it is.
I am sure that the fact EVERYONE wants to see Viper VS Liereyy had something to do with the arrangements in scenario A.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
