Lovely report, will there not be one more to wrap up the tournament?
F in the chat
Stop the Classical games (all of them are draws) and start playing Ultrabullet.
If Ultra is too slow , make it Ultra Berserk , end the tournament in 1 minute and go home...
Many thanks for the reports , Lichess , keep up the great work!!
If Ultra is too slow , make it Ultra Berserk , end the tournament in 1 minute and go home...
Many thanks for the reports , Lichess , keep up the great work!!
While Ding has been performing well at classical games as usual, unfortunately, he certainly hasn't been able to show a similar performance in armageddon games. This must have affected him really badly. This change in format doesn't really prevent draws in classical games ; on the contrary, it promotes draws since a draw and an armageddon win is enough for those who want to win the tournament.
What are the other two games which Rogers chose to omit? Could someone please conveniently link to them?
In some respects I am sympathetic towards Ding, but in this format if you can't convert the Armageddon games then that's going to put you behind your competitors who can. Everyone competing is at risk of this.
On the other hand one thing I'm not too happy about it the way the points are weighted. I don't think Carlsen should be able to seal victory on his Armageddon performance alone and I don't think Yu should be sitting with such a score margin in second place due to his Armageddon prowess.
I took the liberty of playing around with the scoring thanks to the link (norwaychesspoints.herokuapp.com/) and the best I could come up with, if we're interested in rewarding classical players like Ding, is 3pts for a win and 1.5pts for a draw in Classical and 1pt for a win in Armageddon.
This relegates Armageddon games as the opportunity to win a bonus point in the tournament which, although valuable, isn't game breaking for the tournament positions. If you input my suggested weighting with the scores in the website you'll notice that none of the players have changed rank on the leader-board. However, what is interesting is that a 1.5pt draw in Classical for 3rd placed Levon or 4th placed Wesley would put them 1pt (or 1 Armageddon win) ahead of Ding. Whereas with the current scoring both players would still be lagging behind Ding by a full point with a draw in Classical. Not to mention that with my scoring adjustment both 3rd and 4th place would be drawing level with Carlsen at the top of the table with a 3pt Classical win.
This is where I'd like to see the scoring at. Ding has done well to convert his "bonus" Armageddon points, but I somewhat agree that the scoring for this shouldn't come at the cost of Classical play. I'd be much happier with the tournament as it stands with my adjustment to the score weighting. Those are my two cents anyway.
On the other hand one thing I'm not too happy about it the way the points are weighted. I don't think Carlsen should be able to seal victory on his Armageddon performance alone and I don't think Yu should be sitting with such a score margin in second place due to his Armageddon prowess.
I took the liberty of playing around with the scoring thanks to the link (norwaychesspoints.herokuapp.com/) and the best I could come up with, if we're interested in rewarding classical players like Ding, is 3pts for a win and 1.5pts for a draw in Classical and 1pt for a win in Armageddon.
This relegates Armageddon games as the opportunity to win a bonus point in the tournament which, although valuable, isn't game breaking for the tournament positions. If you input my suggested weighting with the scores in the website you'll notice that none of the players have changed rank on the leader-board. However, what is interesting is that a 1.5pt draw in Classical for 3rd placed Levon or 4th placed Wesley would put them 1pt (or 1 Armageddon win) ahead of Ding. Whereas with the current scoring both players would still be lagging behind Ding by a full point with a draw in Classical. Not to mention that with my scoring adjustment both 3rd and 4th place would be drawing level with Carlsen at the top of the table with a 3pt Classical win.
This is where I'd like to see the scoring at. Ding has done well to convert his "bonus" Armageddon points, but I somewhat agree that the scoring for this shouldn't come at the cost of Classical play. I'd be much happier with the tournament as it stands with my adjustment to the score weighting. Those are my two cents anyway.
Excellent write-up! Contributions from very competent chess writers is a very welcome addition to an already very good site!
I used the link supplied by pieceofpecanpie and I think making the total points per round 3 points rather than 2 (like it was in Norway), and with weighting it 3-0 (for a classical win) and 2-1 (for an Armaggedon win after a classical draw) is the most balanced. This way, playing for a win in classical is certainly much more valuable (full point difference in value rather than only a half point between the two wins), however, Armaggedon prowess can still shine through. Using this method I achieved the following:
Carlsen at 19 points in 1st (given he was only one of two players on +2 in classical and won all 6 Armaggedon games this makes total sense)
Ding, Fabi, So, and Yu Yangyi all in a 4-way tie for 2nd/3rd/4th/5th at 15 points. (This may seem crazy, but Fabi and So were both +1 in classical and even in Armaggedon so they would and should be tied in basically any scoring system. Ding was +2 in classical, but he did terribly in Armaggedon and if you're going to make Armaggedon matter at all it ought to be able to offset at least 1 classical game win. Yu did phenomenal in Armageddon going 4-1 while maintianing 50% in classical. He got outright 2nd in the current format which is probably too much, but being in a 4 way tie for 2nd which basically means he finished top half is not too much.)
Levon at 14 points
Anand and MVL at 12 points
Grischuk and Mamedyarov at 9 points (All 5 of the bottom half seem pretty spot on based off performance.)
So, yeah. They got close with the current scoring, but Armaggedons are too heavily weighted. Make it 3-0 or 2-1. Beside that, no need to deal with half points at all this way.
Carlsen at 19 points in 1st (given he was only one of two players on +2 in classical and won all 6 Armaggedon games this makes total sense)
Ding, Fabi, So, and Yu Yangyi all in a 4-way tie for 2nd/3rd/4th/5th at 15 points. (This may seem crazy, but Fabi and So were both +1 in classical and even in Armaggedon so they would and should be tied in basically any scoring system. Ding was +2 in classical, but he did terribly in Armaggedon and if you're going to make Armaggedon matter at all it ought to be able to offset at least 1 classical game win. Yu did phenomenal in Armageddon going 4-1 while maintianing 50% in classical. He got outright 2nd in the current format which is probably too much, but being in a 4 way tie for 2nd which basically means he finished top half is not too much.)
Levon at 14 points
Anand and MVL at 12 points
Grischuk and Mamedyarov at 9 points (All 5 of the bottom half seem pretty spot on based off performance.)
So, yeah. They got close with the current scoring, but Armaggedons are too heavily weighted. Make it 3-0 or 2-1. Beside that, no need to deal with half points at all this way.
Armageddon Master Carlsen Moves Ahead was win this tounement
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.