| |
BGonline.org Forums
A false equivalence, IMO
Posted By: Jack Edelson In Response To: A false equivalence, IMO (Jim Stutz)
Date: Tuesday, 4 September 2018, at 9:26 p.m.
It's an interesting idea. I talked to David about it briefly in San Jose and haven't decided how I feel about it. I'm thinking about some scenarios, and may have more thoughts later. But I will comment on the comparison to half-point byes in chess, as there is an important difference -- though of course there is no obligation to do exactly as chess tournaments do.
In chess, a player can request a half-point bye if they cannot play a particular round of a tournament. (Generally, players have to request these in advance for the later rounds, to prevent people from taking half-point byes when they realize they only need a half point to win a prize. Furthermore, the number of half-point byes players can take in a tournament is limited.) This is not the situation in a Swiss backgammon tournament.
In the situation discussed here, chess Swisses handle the matter just about exactly as backgammon Swisses have done. A full point is given to the lowest-rated player among players with the lowest score, as long as they have not received a previous full-point bye. Such a player is likely to be the weakest in the field, one who would probably lose if they actually played. But the principle here is that an odd-sized field should not deny anybody the chance to seek a full point, even if it's unlikely that they would have earned one.
I'll add one more point here. Most backgammon players like to play backgammon. If they are being deprived an opportunity to play, while getting nothing in return, that might not be a pleasant experience. The bye can be seen as (perhaps overly generous) compensation for having nothing to do for that round.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.