Posts from Speed and aggression.

To Gaudin:
There's a thread about the Swiss system and its discussion; stop bringing your grievances into this, as they are not the core of the problem.

You are wrong. This thread is not about discussing the Swiss system; it's about the "Speed and Onslaught" tournament.
Based on:
II. Organizer's Responsibilities and Rights.
d) When discussing the rules, deadlines, and regulations with players before the tournament begins, simultaneously with registration, all changes must be made in the first post and announced in the thread. Changes to the rules and regulations after the tournament has started (i.e., after the first match has been played) are allowed only in extreme cases;
And as you may have noticed, the tournament has already started, and the first match is long gone, so discussing rules, deadlines, regulations, and the draw is inappropriate at this stage. And as everyone knows, "extreme cases" have also occurred in the tournament (the infamous 0.5 points for a postponed match), and they were resolved with the involvement of a neutral party, namely Dirty_Player.
Based on this, I advise the organizer of this tournament to delete all messages, including this one (post), starting with the first post of our favorite, R55Max, as they are NOT RELATED TO THIS TOPIC.
P.S. for R55Max. Create a separate thread about the Swiss system; I think it could be useful

The discussion about the Swiss tournament has been moved to a separate thread. Please respect the organizer's efforts.

To Gaudin:

Do you consider your phrase "about the little king in his little world" to be normal and constructive?

This was said in response to your message, the essence of which boiled down to this:
I have neither the desire nor the time for this debate.
I spent a lot of time contacting everyone on ICQ every day.
Just one LSM was enough to drive me crazy.
So I won't be debating.

Later, I also responded in a similar appropriate tone. Unfortunately, you took everything the wrong way and are still trying to sort out personal issues on the forum, which is not good. The job of an organizer is difficult, so the fact that you contacted everyone on ICQ is not worth mentioning.

Don't confuse a commanding tone with indignation.

What do the tournament rules actually say? Take your first post, go to the link to the Swiss system, read its rules, and using the rules described in that link, try to trace the draw and who plays against whom.
THIS WILL NOT WORK, because the "additional rule" (which is not in the rules in the link) comes into effect: awarding 0.5 points "mutually," which is also impossible to guess without an announcement from the judge/organizer. Without knowing this, it is impossible to understand and trace the chain of all rounds. AND MOREOVER, this method (adding 0.5 points) is, according to the link in your first post, UNDESIRABLE for the tournament; the link to your rules says so.

And most importantly, you were told that discussing the rules during the tournament is "bad form."
But you ignored this and are starting to bring everything back to discussing the system.

In fact, I raised this topic in order to discuss the conduct of the Swiss system in your tournament, so that there would be no more misunderstandings in the future. Bad form is refusing to discuss it on ICQ and not admitting that the draws in the tournament were not conducted according to the rules specified in the tournament. You could have admitted that there are differences between the rules and what was done, but explained this, at least, with human kindness. BUT YOU DO NOT AGREE that there is a difference. It's your business, but it's not right.

At least other organizers will hopefully not repeat my mistakes.

I hope you will too. Stop shedding tears - defend the subject of the dispute, and don't turn everything into a personal matter.

If you, as the tournament organizer, still do not see the difference between our positions and believe that my position is not viable, then there is no point in us talking at all. If, however, you have managed to understand the essence of my grievances, then we can continue the discussion on ICQ, if you have something to say to me (which I am always ready to do with anyone).
I suggest leaving forum discussions and personal grievances to yourself, and putting the dialogue about the system in the first place.

But it is worth discussing the Swiss system.

To wasserman:
You can say that this is one of the extreme cases ))). Now the topic has been created specifically for discussion, which is very good.

To Gaudin:
...
Just one LSM was enough to drive me crazy.
...

Mr. Gaudin, I must point out that I didn't "drive you crazy," but rather, you were unable to answer my simple questions regarding your own rules and their implementation by the participants. Eventually, you concluded that you no longer wanted to ask or consult with anyone and made your decision based on what you considered to be correct, rather than following the rules. This certainly fits your description of me "driving you crazy," but as the saying goes, "a bad taste remains." In the end, after warning you in advance, I calmly withdrew from the tournament without dragging our entire conversation onto the forum and bothering other people. Therefore, please refrain from involving me in this tournament and complaining that I supposedly "drove you crazy." That's not true, and it's not very polite.

P.S.

This is an absolutely NORMAL situation in real chess tournaments; to avoid delaying the draw, postponed games are scheduled.

This is an absolutely UNUSUAL situation in real chess tournaments. In chess tournaments played using the Swiss system, the draw for the next round is not conducted until the previous round is finished. I'm telling you this as a frequent participant in these very Swiss system chess tournaments, including national ones like the Aeroflot Open, and also as a chess tournament judge, conducting tournaments both in a round-robin and Swiss system.

P.P.S. If it's not too much trouble, could you provide an example of a Swiss system chess tournament where the draw for the next round was conducted before the previous round was finished? Perhaps I missed something, and chess has also developed its own "Fursenko" system...

P.P.P.S.

I didn't delve too deeply into the topic because I don't want to waste time reading lengthy, pointless discussions. I'll just say that in Heroes, an online tournament using the Swiss system cannot be conducted without postponed games. With this system, the only option is a conditional draw; otherwise, either everyone waits, or those who didn't finish on time receive a technical result (which is also not correct because there will be many such results).

Yes. That's why the standard Swiss system is not a very good choice for such tournaments. Modified Swiss systems with conditional 0.5 points are also not a solution to the problem; they're just a band-aid.
By the way, I was also surprised by the choice of head-to-head and Berger as additional indicators, rather than Buchholz. While the head-to-head can be understood, as a way to choose the stronger player in a direct match, although this is strange for the Swiss system, Berger is usually used in round-robin tournaments, while Buchholz and progress are used in Swiss tournaments.

I actually sign up for tournaments not to play, but to argue and troll! That's more fun! :D :D :D

to all: if you are so good at criticizing and claim to know how it should be done, then organize your own tournament, FOLLOWING EXACTLY THE RULES that you are currently defending in your point of view, and let's see after which round the criticism will start and people will begin to drop out...

to all if you criticize so well and claim to know how it should be done, then organize your own tournament, FOLLOWING EXACTLY THE RULES THAT YOU ARE NOW DEFENDING FROM YOUR POINT OF VIEW, and let's see after which round the stones will start flying and people will start dropping out...

Believe me, stones fly from all sides even with "ideal" rules :D There are disputes about unfairness, disputes about the unfairness of the game ending, and so on, and all of this is part of the tournament struggle. Of course, everyone wants everything to be smooth, but if it's not, then you need to sort it out. The organizer is obliged to treat each player impartially and to understand and resolve all disputes. This is very difficult when you have to expend energy on emotions.

Believe me, cobblestones fly from all sides even with "ideal" rules :D There are disputes about unfairness, disputes about the injustice of the game ending, and so on, and all of this is part of the tournament struggle. Of course, everyone wants everything to go smoothly, but if it's not smooth, you need to sort it out. The organizer is obliged to treat each player impartially and to understand and resolve all disputes. This is very difficult when you have to expend energy on emotions.

Well, that's exactly it, the organizer already doesn't have the strength to deal with all the controversial situations (and there are always a lot of them)... we are all human, and we all perfectly understand that reality can often prevail... but you also jumped in with your dispute, which everyone already understood, so who wouldn't lose their nerves! In general, I play for fun and don't see the point in upsetting anyone, it doesn't matter who, how, or what they do, everyone was happy (absent opponents don't count :)), it still won't change anything, you should have "spoken up" at the beginning of the tournament, not at its logical conclusion. What, by the way, were you thinking about in the second round when there were already postponed matches?)))

To hunter98:

You need to start analyzing the results from at least the 3rd round, as the 2nd round doesn't really tell you much if you don't pay close attention, and you just mentioned having difficulties in real life.

What difference does it make who, how, and what they do, everyone was happy with it (no-shows don't count:), it still won't change anything.

This question was quite amusing. The difference has been explained many times above.

Stop crying – defend what you're arguing about.

But no one is crying. The subject of the argument... But what is the argument about? Look. One participant honestly played all the matches in 4 rounds and lost them all. He is at the bottom of the tournament table. Another participant played only one match in the 1st round and lost. But he finished the 4th round in a far from last position, thanks to technical wins. Does this reflect the real skill of the players? Yes, but only for one, the one who played all the matches. The second one advanced not thanks to his skill, but only due to unfair opponents. A conditional draw (postponed match) allows to somewhat level this factor. Let the opponents play. The person has no internet. And he is not to blame for this; the provider is to blame, but he is given a loss, although it is clear to everyone that he could have beaten his opponent. The postponed match gave them the opportunity to play, and both players, with results corresponding to their real skill, advance to the next round. The same situation occurs in a double-elimination tournament. One advances thanks to honestly played games, and the other – thanks to technical wins. In both systems, the strongest will win, because you cannot win a tournament based solely on technical wins if there are fair players in the tournament. The only solution is for everyone to play on time and with full effort. Not to forfeit on turn 113 simply because they don't want to play, but to HONESTLY play all their matches. This never happens. You can't program a person: "Play, play honestly, with full effort, and always on time." Only in this case will the tournament results reflect the REAL skill of the players. All of this is so elementary and obvious that I am surprised why it needs to be explained. You accuse me of not posting this in the rules. You didn't calmly ask your question when you had a misunderstanding. You wrote a huge post in which, with sarcasm and acrimony, you began to DEMAND that I explain everything to you. Then you started avoiding playing with Gomungulus, burst into my ICQ with a cry about "stupid rules." Then, in the thread of an ongoing tournament, you started clarifying some nuances that were unclear to you alone. I explained everything to all interested participants in ICQ. I have never refused to talk to anyone. But when I am spoken to in such a tone, I will not tolerate it. And you think this is adequate behavior? In my opinion, this is more like the behavior of a hysteric. You could have calmly said that something was unclear to you, asked for clarification, and asked to include it in the rules. And no problems. No, you wrote, "Let's get everything sorted out here" and brought up "murky waters." And I don't care what smiley accompanies it. I am not your friend, brother, or cousin. Therefore, communicate correctly, within the bounds of human decency. And your behavior is even more unpleasant because it is the behavior of a potential tournament winner. You have already started to act so proprietarily in the thread, ignoring the posts of other players and demanding that I explain something to you. I hope I have explained the reasons for my reaction to your behavior. P.S. And I am not going to cry in response to your rude behavior. That would be too much of an honor. And I think that the further we stay away from each other, the better for both of us. So, run your tournament according to your "ideal" rules. Not "Favorites," which have already been held for the 4th time according to established and well-worn rules, where people have already learned their lessons before you. Create your own, something new, and I will watch how you do it. I will definitely not participate in your tournament. Good luck with your efforts! :)

By the way, the second indicator in the Swiss system should be the Buchholz score, as LSM correctly pointed out.

By the way, the second criterion in the Swiss system should be the Buchholz score, as LSM correctly pointed out.

Hmm? But I set these additional criteria after consulting with Dogbas, whom I trust more. :)
True, I didn't consult with LSM about which coefficient would be better. :)

Excellent....

We're waiting for the Swiss system tournament from LSM.
I'm out, by the way.

By the way, LSM, who is also Corsar, who is also Kyrre.
I told you right away in ICQ that I appreciate your tactful behavior in not bringing the discussion to the forum.
And we discussed it in ICQ for TWO days.
And the conclusion was only one.
If you saw a violation, you should have immediately stopped the game and contacted the judges.
A similar situation occurred in the novice tournament in the match between Dimast and ariputra.
Everything was resolved by replaying the match.
You didn't do that. And I explained this in ICQ for TWO days.
By the way,

it all came down to the fact that you no longer want to ask or consult with anyone.

Because these consultations ALREADY took place.
Dirty_Player is aware of the situation regarding you.
You can contact him. At that time, you didn't have the courage. And you contacted him under the nickname Kyrre.
And I don't know if Dirty_Player himself can handle more than an hour of communication with you. :)

Sorry for being so frank. :)
But you and R55 are alike.
With your, I apologize, tediousness.
Guys, you take the game too seriously.
I personally play to have fun, not to waste nerves and energy on all sorts of meticulous calculations and arguments.
You won't find a perfect system. And, most importantly, there will ALWAYS be dissatisfied people, no matter what

A tournament per week is the goal of the "Swiss" system and Gaudin, well done, he did a great job handling such a complex task.
The tournament was designed to be quick, and the name reflects that: "Speed and Pressure."
A conditional result is an excellent way to avoid delaying the draw and reduce the number of technical results (as a last resort). This option is available in the program.
In the "Swiss" system, in case of a tie in points, the following is used in descending order:
1. Head-to-head result
2. Buchholz coefficient (the points of opponents are summed with weighted coefficients of 1=win, 1=draw, 1=loss)
3. Sonneborn-Berger coefficient (the points of opponents are summed with weights of 2=win, 1=draw, 0=loss)
"Wikipedia" is incorrect in this case.
An important difference in the program: Berger distinguishes between a technical win and a regular win, which is why it was chosen.
In general, the coefficients do not reflect the real balance of power and are essentially a "coin toss." Ideally, an additional game should be played for prize-winning places.

04.04.2012 R55Max (red, random, Rampart, Melody, Shakti) def Gomunguls (blue, random, Tower, Halon, Tyraxor) speed1 m-u, 126.

Confirmed!
They gave me Tower three times)) that's crazy... the opponent got Conflux twice and then Rampart in the last one... The game turned out to be interesting, but the opponent had an advantage in castle power, artifacts, and much more money. I had a good start, took Pandora with 35 Golems, losing a Gargoyle and a Wolf, revealed a Park, Pandora for 5000 gold... then I killed some computer-controlled heroes, found boots, and leveled up Tyraxor a bit, on 1.2.1 I broke a couple of Confluxes and ran to the Treasure, the presence of mana there wouldn't have decided anything in the Final Battle... because the Elves were closing in and they were shooting powerfully... and I hadn't bought Nagas and Mages yet, so the Sword, Shield, and the rest of the advantage decided the outcome... then we ran around a bit and I decided not to drag it out, because I didn't see a Nelk that would capture the castle at the end))
There were no errors in the game, but after reviewing the game, I regret that I didn't take a risk in the first stage and played less aggressively. The opponent played well, and I congratulate him on the victory!
P.S. in my army in the Final Battle, there were 50+ Golems, 5 Angels, 180+ Gremlins, and a few Gargoyles)
Thank you for the game!!!

I don't understand why you're so upset. This is a "new" organizer. And you decided to boss him around because he's new to the forum and doesn't have any influence? He basically came out of nowhere, read a bit about the site, and decided to run a FUN tournament, specifically for fun. And he wasn't doing it in a completely arrogant way; he was actually trying.

Especially you, R55. As Vic liked to say, you look like someone just "stepped on your dick." Your precious opinion wasn't taken into account, and you turned this tournament into such a grindfest.

That's how it looks from the outside.

You were talking about developing heroes, blah blah blah, 30 pages, and somewhere in there, you mentioned that it requires talent. As the saying goes, "talent is everything." Now, keep in mind that the people who are doing all of this aren't getting paid a dime. So, think about where this talent will come from if you treat people who are trying to do something for the first time, something good for the forum, like this? If you had any brains, you wouldn't be acting like a frustrated, insecure idiot, waving a link to Wikipedia around like a literature teacher with a textbook, but instead, you would be more understanding. More tolerant, even though I don't like that word. At least because the person is just starting to do something, their first tournament. And about the tone, too, don't be like "look at me, listen to me," but just offer some advice, help in a gentler way. Even if you think he's wrong about something, and if you're smarter, then act like a smarter person, not stoop to the level of a troll.

People should be encouraged for their efforts, and as they grow, you can set higher expectations for them, but not all at once!

And your super-correct links are not needed by anyone, initially. The tournament was conceived as a fun one, based on LoL's unpolished templates. It was progressing slowly, until people started casting "mass-flame" spells.

I suggest closing this idiotic thread for trolling. I mean, not for the moderators, but for the participants themselves. Those who participate in the tournament and disagree with the judging and how it's being run can withdraw in protest. The people who are happy with everything and who came to play, not to show off "how smart they are," can continue playing. I'm sure there are many more of them. And any further flooding in the tournament thread, a "march of the dissatisfied," should be deleted, by asking the moderators to do so.