New standard method for resolving 3-way ties on the ABT
Posted By: Bob Koca In Response To: New standard method for resolving 3-way ties on the ABT (Rich Munitz)
Date: Monday, 18 June 2018, at 8:34 p.m.
In Response To: New standard method for resolving 3-way ties on the ABT (Rich Munitz)
"• A contingent bye is awarded to one player randomly chosen from among those who received the fewest byes previously in the event. Suppose A is chosen."
I see a big problem with this step. Suppose that in a Swiss event that player A has not recevied a bye while players B and C did receive a bye. Giving player A a bye then is not an unfair massive equity increase but instead a fairly deserved one that should not be counteracted with other measures.
If one thinks otherwise what is your thouht on the following hypothetical situation: In a basketball game it is agreed in advance that team A gets 5 points added to their score at the end of the first quarter and that team B get 5 points added to their score at the end of the 3rd quarter. Which best describes the situation: i)it does not change the win chance or team A. ii) team B's win chance is improved since they got their 5 points at a more key point in the game.
As a general policy question I am wondering why this wasn't put up for general comment before being enacted?
Messages In This Thread
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.