Tags: play chess online, chess, play chess online, play chess online, chess, chess, backgammon
Team play forum
nsa-hitachi.com << online chess - < chess - chess > - chess online >>
| From | Message | Posted by coyotefan
nsa-hitachi.com
3/31/2004
22:27:00
Play online chess |  Subject: Discussion Team play/Ladder/Team League
Message:
I swore I would play out my games and leave quietly, but this whole team debate/problem is getting worse and worse. Mike admits that there is little support for ELO but refuses to have a vote for ELO or the old team points system. No other options, just ELO or points.
Now there is another separate team proposal for a team ladder. Again the Webmaster is trying to take something that works for individual play and force it into a team concept.
Everyone recognizes that the current challange system will not work as the higher team has ZERO incentive to accept a challange. There must be forced challanges.
The only way I can see the ladder even being started is for all teams to have the same number of players, and have a minimum/maximum rating range. Further there needs to be a cap on the number of games teams are forced to play. It also have to be an even number of challanges/being challanged. Challanges have to work like leagues do now, no option to refuse.
Here is what I mean. Lets say that the average GK rating is 1500, and it is decided that teams will consist of 5 players. Average rating would be 7500 for a 5 player team. Giving some leighway up and down would mean teams would have to fit into a 7000-8000 rating range. This would be the only fair way to put together a team. It would be crazy to allow 5 players rated 2000 each to make a team. That is like the New York Yankees being allowed to play a tee-ball team. Then lets say that the maximum number of games would be 6. This means that every player on every team says they can play 6 team games. of these 6 games three would be challanges from teams below and three would be challanges placed to teams above.
Here is the problem. Lets assume that a match will take six months to complete. This means that a team can move up a maximum of six places a year.Now assume that there are 100 teams. team 100, winning every challange and never having any team leapfrog them, will take 16 years to get to number one. I do not know about you, but I do not plan to fight 16 years to get to number one!
A team league would have to work the same way. Of course, challanging only within their own league using the same 6 games, six months means a team can move up one league a year. Again, this is assuming that the team wins every match. Talk about boring.
| Posted by coyotefan
nsa-hitachi.com
4/01/2004
05:06:03
Play online chess | Two other items to keep League/Ladder fair
Message:
There would need to be some sort of guidelines that makes sure that ratings are fair. I would suggest a human to make the decisions within guidelines. Limits on time-outs, and minimum number of games played. As an extreme example, there needs to be a way to make sure that Felix cannot join a team with a rating of 1.
Another item is that when someone drops out of a team, the team must select a member who keeps the team rating within the limits, not comperable to the dropped player.
| Posted by coyotefan
nsa-hitachi.com
4/01/2004
10:39:47
Play online chess | If interested to post reply
Message:
Please do so int eh GK area. it hnk this belongs there and I copied it over.
———
Underdogs on Top in World Chess Championship Candidates Matches — The first round of the World Chess Championship Candidates Matches in Kazan, Russia, produced several surprises. The biggest was the elimination of Levon Aronian, who is ranked No. 3 in the world, by Alexander Grischuk (No. 12), whose recent play has been inconsistent but who prevailed in the tiebreaker games. Gata Kamsky, fresh off winning the United States title, produced another upset by beating Veselin Topalov, a former world chess champion. Topalov (No. 7) has not played much in recent months, and that hurt him. He was outplayed by Kamsky (No. 18) in Game 2, which Kamsky won, and in the last game, when Kamsky forced a draw. Boris Gelfand (No. 16), who will be 43 next month and ...
|
|