Chess Scotland Noticeboard

Alan Tate · King Joined: 01 Feb 2007 Posts: 377 Location: Edinburgh

Last time we debated this topic I was against the 3 1 0 scoring system but have warmed to it whilst watching the London Classic tournament. The games are very interesting and hard fought, so in my opinion the 3 1 0 system is working for this tournament.
I think some players just need a little push to make that extra effort to go for a win instead of settling for a draw i.e. Kramnik, and his games are great to watch when he fights!

I'd like to see it in more top level tournaments and perhaps it could be tried in some tournaments in Scotland as well. I know a draw should be a correct result but sport should also be about entertainment....
Anyway, shouldn't a draw be the correct result between two football teams of the same strength?

JR · King Joined: 23 Jan 2007 Posts: 447 Location: Edinburgh

I would suggest that the scoring system has very little to do with the fighting chess we are seeing, but more to do with the no draw rule.

The overall drawing average of the tourament is still quite high, which I think proves the point that whatever you do to try and discourage draws, a draw is still the most likely result between players at the highest level.

There have been 24 games played so far with 8 decisive results. This means that 2/3 of games are still being drawn. I am pretty sure this is very similar to the drawing average for most events of this standard.

Gavin · Bishop Joined: 04 Aug 2007 Posts: 33 Location: Dunfermline

The vindication of the system is not in the fact there have been fewer draws but in the fact there have been more hard-fought games. I agree though that the Sofia rules have been the main reason for that rather than the 3/1/0.

Nonetheless I'm all in favour of the scoring system, particularly in an event like this where the players are effectively paid entertainers. It's less clear how well that argument applies in a standard weekend Congress, but even there a large part of the reason why people are happy to subsidise bigger prizes in the Open that the top players will usually walk off with is because we like being able to watch them play at close quarters.

admin · Site Admin Joined: 09 Jan 2007 Posts: 1386

CARLSEN WINS!!!!

With Kramnik drawing, even if Carlsen loses, he wins on tie break

AMcHarg · Posted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 5:51 pm Post subject:

Don't think Magnus will lose anyway, it's a draw at best for Short imo. Very Happy

Mike Scott · King Joined: 01 Feb 2007 Posts: 676 Location: Edinburgh

I would be interested to know the players view on what they would have done in that marathon game in rd 1 that Short lost. Had Sofia rules not been in place but only the 3-1-0 pts system would McShane (?) have played on anyway for the win to get the 3 pts?

I am assuming that normally such a game would have been been agreed a draw under normal rules.

Jack Rudd · Bishop Joined: 16 Mar 2007 Posts: 27

Using 3-1-0 in a match is exactly the same as using 2-1-0, surely? The only thing that matters in a match is winning more games than your opponents do.

Alan Jelfs · Queen Joined: 31 Mar 2007 Posts: 81

I'm not that bothered about 3-1-0 or 1-0.5-0 scoring in weekend congresses - it would never make the difference between me entering or not.
It does affect the psychology of 'playing for a win' though.

A few years ago, the Marymass tried the 3-1-0 system.
After 4 rounds of the Major, I was fortunate enough to be in the lead with 4 wins (12 points). My opponent in the last round was Eddie Ferry, who had 3 wins and a draw (10 points).
Now, in a 'normal' tournament, a draw for Eddie in the last round would give him 4 points and guarantee him at least a share of 2nd prize. But here a draw was no good - it would leave him on 11 points, vulnerable to being overtaken by a number of players on 9 points (3 wins) after 4 rounds.
So he had to play for the win, which he achieved with a nice Queen sac.

One drawback with 3-1-0 scoring, though, is that with a greater range of possible scores there are mathematically likely to be fewer players in contention for prizes in the last round.

admin · Site Admin Joined: 09 Jan 2007 Posts: 1386

DMB · King Joined: 08 Mar 2007 Posts: 267

The only drawback to three points for a win in domestic events is the potential to cheat. Two friends in last round realise a draw gets them nothing - so one loses and will return the favour the next time they are in that situation.

There is no evidence of dubious point manipulation in Scottish events or for that matter in the long experiment at Glenrothes but the potential to chuck extra points ruins the idea.

This point made here http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4232

******
If you want to reduce quick draws in domestic events just have no agreed draws allowed before the first time control. No doubt players who very much want to draw will find a suitable line for a repetition - although that will fall foul of prearranging the result if found out.

Gavin · Bishop Joined: 04 Aug 2007 Posts: 33 Location: Dunfermline

Alan Tate · King Joined: 01 Feb 2007 Posts: 377 Location: Edinburgh

Not convinced that the Sofia rule was mainly responsible for the fighting chess we saw in London. I just felt that this London tourney had an extra 'bite' to it, and the football scoring system added to this significantly.

These guys are paid entertainers after all!

Also not convinced that the rule could lead to more cheating if used in weekend congresses. Cheaters will find a way to cheat regardless.

By the way, did Glenrothes actually run worse using the 3 1 0 system??

George Thomson · Rook Joined: 17 Oct 2008 Posts: 51

Graeme Forbes · Posted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:47 pm Post subject:

George Thomson · Rook Joined: 17 Oct 2008 Posts: 51