WCH candidates final tie break rule


Back to forum

Andrew Stephenson    (2008-02-06)
WCH candidates final tie break rule

Thibault I noticed on reading the rules for the candidates final that "the knockout tournament winner is qualified for stage 5 if all games are draw, the round-robin cycle winner if not all games are draw." Why did you not just stick with the tie break rule that applies for all other matches? Namely the higher TER (tournament entry rating)goes through on even score if all games drawn or lower TER on even score if not all drawn? Why have you made a special different tie break rule for the candidates final match?

Thibault de Vassal    (2008-02-07 01:41:22)
WCH candidates final tie break rule

Good question... Well, it seems coherent : WCH rules favour ratings, it is very unlikely to happen that the knockout cycle winner's rating is inferior to the round-robin cycle winner's one, anyway the rules clearly favour the highest TER, which is the one of the knockout cycle winner at the beginning of the cycle.

Andrew Stephenson    (2008-02-07 02:59:03)
Tie break rules

Yes knock out winner likely to have higher rating. However the round robin winner might have increased rating in getting to the candidate final. For example in 000002 Harry Ingersol could draw all his games in the knockout final and drop from his rating of TER 2555 and go through to candidate final (his future rating at the moment predicted at 2493)The other contestant Wolfgang has a predicted rating at 2489. Whereas Daniel Brunsteins could put in a strong showing winning the round robin final and improve his TER of 2476 (future rating estimated at 2487)Its quite possible that he could go into a candidates match with the higher TER and lose where all the games are drawn under the present rule. Why not just keep to the higher TER winner for an even result with draws and the lower TER tie break winning in a tie where the ganes were not all drawn

Thibault de Vassal    (2008-02-07 03:43:44)
Tie break rules

This set of rules favour the players with the highest TER at the start of the cycle (or CER - cycle entry rating), who play the knockout cycle, anyway the challenge for a player coming from the round-robin cycle - so difficult already - is just even more interesting :) .. looking at the first candidates final, I'm not sure at all who's favourite according to these rules. Xavier Pichelin is a dangerous player with an under-evaluated rating yet, he had to win (several) games in all stages of the round-robin tournament and he did it well, now quite the same situation but only one win could put him in a favourable position. He's used to this challenge, I think it is just more challenging and interesting this way. But the main idea is always to favour the highest tournament (here I should say cycle) entry rating.

"Victory belongs to who wants it more" (Bobby Fischer)

Andrew Stephenson    (2008-02-07 09:33:55)
cycle entry rating??

Thibault now your really confusing me?? I do not think there is any concept of cycle entry rating being followed in your WC system! In the knockout stages players ratings change so there entry rating changes in different stages. eg Wolfgang entered the quarter finals for 000002 with a TER of 2460 he was successful (against you)and played the semi final with improved TER 2523 and for the the knockout TER was the same 2523 with Harry had TER with 2456 for quarters but went to semis with TER 2459 and for knockout final his TER changed again to 2555. Now if CER is operating Thibault, the knockout final match should contain entry ratings at the start of the cycle ...this is extremely important because that would have wolfgang on 2460 and Harry on 2456 which will make a difference as it reverses the TER at present showing in that match leading to opposite results in the event of a tie. The same occurs for the stages and round robin finals - updated ratings are used for tie breaks at each stage. Anyway for the next cycle why do you not just change the candidate tie break rule to make it consistent with all the other tie break rules ie based on TER at the time the stage commences. It does not make any sense to give an advantage to say the no 8 rated player at the start of the cycle who goes into knockout over the no 9 rated player going into the stage and round robin. Both players will benefit from improved TER during the course of the cycle before they meet in the candidates final where there strength at that entry point should be a tie breaking factor and not where there rating was 1 year or more years earlier- the more so as their changed ratings since will/may have been used as tie breakers along the way anyway. Either that or introduce cycle entry ratings concept and keep ratings fixed for the duration of the cycle for tie break purposes for all matches and stages!

Thibault de Vassal    (2008-02-07 17:05:08)
WCH candidates final tie break rule

I understand your point of view but I see no problem with this "CER rule" at stage 4. It looks 'logical' to me, firstly because this stage is not included in what is called the knockout cycle (just like stage 5, with another rule), then because the round-robin winner still appears like the challenger in this match.

Now we may have a poll on this issue and continue to discuss it, why not...

Should the same TER rule apply at stage 4 like in the first 3 stages of the knockout cycle ? Who is favourable to the current rule ?

Andrew Stephenson    (2008-02-07 18:50:03)
Candidates final tie break rule

I vote for 1 consistent single tie break system for all matches and round robins: player higher TER at the start wins if all games drawn loses if not all games drawn. The tie break rule is complex enough without suddenly switching. To answer your 2 points Thibault: 1) The round robin winner is a sort of "challenger" to the knock out winner thus its right to give the knock out a tie break win if all games drawn and require the round robin winner to win a game to go through on a tie. But the whole process is a method of determining a challenger for the WCC not a challenger to one of the top eight. 2) Tie break system is different for WCC challenger ie champ keeps title in the event of a draw. Well this isdifferent and its easy to understand that its necessary to beat the champ to take the title. This difference does not explain having a different tie break system in the candidates - there is no challenge here and no title at stake. Each cycle is a challenger selection process and we need 1 consistent tie break method for each stage.

Thibault de Vassal    (2008-02-08 00:57:29)
Candidates final tie break rule

"But the whole process is a method of determining a challenger for the WCC not a challenger to one of the top eight." << Well, actually it is also in a way, why not ? :) Anyway, thank you for discussing this point and trying to improve the rules, it would be great to know the opinion of other players !