But I am breaking that personal record by entering Coulsdon Chess Fellowship's autumn daytime congress, which is being held at the club's Surrey (South London, if you must) venue over 14 consecutive Wednesdays, starting on September 15.
The idea is you play one game each Wednesday, starting at 2pm, with a time limit of 90 minutes plus a 30-second increment.
There is an innovative pairing system:We are now using a new pairing system that pairs players based on their current FIDE rating, rather than the score they are on. In round 1 the players are listed in descending order of strength. A filler is added if possible if we have an odd number. Then the top 2 are paired, then the next 2, then the next 2......and so on. In each round, we will follow the principle of pairing the top player against the highest ranked player they have not already played, then the bottom [I presume this should be 'next highest'] player against the next lowest player they have not already played....and so on. Colour sequence may affect this a little.
Byes can be taken in any round, and unfortunately I have already had to ask for two as I have prior commitments on September 15 and October 13.
That leaves me able to play 12 rounds which, since the entry fee is £20, works out at £1.67 a game. In practice the price will rise as I am fairly sure I will have to ask for one or two more byes.
I think it means what it says with "then the bottom player against the next lowest player they have not already played". If there are n players, in round 1, you pair seed 1 against seed 2, then seed n against seed n-1, presumably then seed 3 against seed 4, seed n-2 against seed n-3, etc... In subsequent rounds you do the same, alternating pairings between the highest and lowest seeded players.
ReplyDeleteYes, that is what it says, but why would they not pair seed 1 v seed 2, seed 3 v seed 4, seed 5 v seed 6, etc, assuming colours were OK?
ReplyDeleteIf manual pairings were being done, based on points scored, it would be normal to pair the players with the highest scores first, then the players with the lowest scores, leaving those in the middle to last.
ReplyDeleteMaybe they think it's a good idea to do the same with this pairing system. It's not obvious why though. With a normal pairing system, pairing can be difficult if unexpected results occur. With this one, the only difficulty I can think of is colour imbalances due to people taking byes or withdrawing.
I never knew that - I thought pairings started from the top and went down, rather than top pair - bottom pair - second-top pair - etc.
ReplyDelete