@Toadofsky: would it be possible to make advanced settings in the swiss tournament which allow to play the same Player twice? would be a kind of double Round Robin... (besides maybe twice the same colour against one opponent)
@philipez I do not know, sorry. (I'd say more but don't want other players to get excited, esp. since I haven't written anything.)
If there is the fear of players leaving the tournament before ending, why not play all the games at the same time. With a time of 1 or more days and a limit on the number of players, this could work. The total time of the tournament is the time spend on the last game that finishes. Other sites have the same option. The thing some of us need is to have the administration of the games of a tournament done by lichess. Otherwise the Tournament Secretaries need to keep an eye on every game that two players of their tournament play.
@Toadofsky #65/#70
@tpr #69
|> The withdrawal problem (already mentioned) - this is unsolvable without a paywall and/or TD certification program.
Maybe players would hestitate a bit more to withdraw, when all games in an RR, even unplayed, would count towards rating?
|> If your online reputation is ruined you can just take another online identity
Right, but this becomes a bit more annoying, when nowadays OTB clubs move to online, where they play in entry restricted teams.
|> nobody has offered a single reason why RR is an interesting format
When we talk about OTB blitz tournaments, RR is the most common pairing system, I cannot even remember having played a blitz swiss ever. Furthermore a RR is the fairest way to determine the winner, because each player plays everyone else, even more so in a double RR, which in my eyes makes it interesting enough ;-)
|> Lichess provides an lichess.org/api for issuing challenges
That's a valid argument, but for all other pairing systems as well ;-) This may be a workaround for the time being, but certainly not for all players . Furthermore these "tournaments" won't count towards tournament points and won't appear in the list of (upcoming) events on the team page.
@tpr #69
|> The withdrawal problem (already mentioned) - this is unsolvable without a paywall and/or TD certification program.
Maybe players would hestitate a bit more to withdraw, when all games in an RR, even unplayed, would count towards rating?
|> If your online reputation is ruined you can just take another online identity
Right, but this becomes a bit more annoying, when nowadays OTB clubs move to online, where they play in entry restricted teams.
|> nobody has offered a single reason why RR is an interesting format
When we talk about OTB blitz tournaments, RR is the most common pairing system, I cannot even remember having played a blitz swiss ever. Furthermore a RR is the fairest way to determine the winner, because each player plays everyone else, even more so in a double RR, which in my eyes makes it interesting enough ;-)
|> Lichess provides an lichess.org/api for issuing challenges
That's a valid argument, but for all other pairing systems as well ;-) This may be a workaround for the time being, but certainly not for all players . Furthermore these "tournaments" won't count towards tournament points and won't appear in the list of (upcoming) events on the team page.
I have to agree with @kleineme. I just wish I'd written that, lol!
You really should have both tournament formats. For large teams swiss and for small teams RR.
@Toadofsky What we need is the ability to comment on comments. Then the forums can be organized and the discussion can continue. These 9-page discussions are pretty incomprehensible to someone who just entered the thread. We can always add more mods if needed. Is it possible? Also, what languages would I need to learn if I could become a dev?
#84
> Furthermore a RR is the fairest way to determine the winner, because each player plays everyone else...
Touché! I agree, so here is my updated "list of reasons I care about" (Swiss is wildly popular; I don't care about having a second popular format):
1. Swiss already prevents rematches, although with RR some colors and ordering of pairings may be different.
2. A RR is the fairest way to determine a tournament winner (esp. for high-stakes events with a small number of players).
> Furthermore a RR is the fairest way to determine the winner, because each player plays everyone else...
Touché! I agree, so here is my updated "list of reasons I care about" (Swiss is wildly popular; I don't care about having a second popular format):
1. Swiss already prevents rematches, although with RR some colors and ordering of pairings may be different.
2. A RR is the fairest way to determine a tournament winner (esp. for high-stakes events with a small number of players).
#69: "I can see a chess club of say 10 members wants to organise a 9 round round robin online as they cannot meet over the board. It is easy to do: just mail the pairings to the players and let white challenge black."
Please don't say that. I've done it and I can tell it's not easy. There were just six of us, but it was a really stressful job while trying to focus on my own (rapid) games. Also, others complained that it was hard to look other people's games and to keep track of standings. Overall, I'd describe the expiriment a failure. On the plus side, nobody left in the middle of the tournament, why would they? They are my friends! Round-robin tournaments implemented on Lichess would be a dream come true for us. If you arrange (or participate in) an online round-robin tournament which is impacted by players quitting, that's obviously on you. Not the Lichess staff at least, that would be a ridiculous argument to make.
Considering the work invested in Swiss tournaments, I really can't believe round-robin would be a gigantic task. It's essentially the same thing, just with different pairing rules. Maybe there's something more, but still: implementing Swiss tournaments from scratch must be a way bigger project. And they are such cool thing to have! All I'm asking is not to rule round-robin out so harshly. Say something like that it's not currently on your road map. That you have other cool projects waiting for attention for now, but perhaps in the future, who knows. Bottom line, never say never; it's not appropriate. Well at least if you don't have waterproof arguments supporting your stance.
Please don't say that. I've done it and I can tell it's not easy. There were just six of us, but it was a really stressful job while trying to focus on my own (rapid) games. Also, others complained that it was hard to look other people's games and to keep track of standings. Overall, I'd describe the expiriment a failure. On the plus side, nobody left in the middle of the tournament, why would they? They are my friends! Round-robin tournaments implemented on Lichess would be a dream come true for us. If you arrange (or participate in) an online round-robin tournament which is impacted by players quitting, that's obviously on you. Not the Lichess staff at least, that would be a ridiculous argument to make.
Considering the work invested in Swiss tournaments, I really can't believe round-robin would be a gigantic task. It's essentially the same thing, just with different pairing rules. Maybe there's something more, but still: implementing Swiss tournaments from scratch must be a way bigger project. And they are such cool thing to have! All I'm asking is not to rule round-robin out so harshly. Say something like that it's not currently on your road map. That you have other cool projects waiting for attention for now, but perhaps in the future, who knows. Bottom line, never say never; it's not appropriate. Well at least if you don't have waterproof arguments supporting your stance.
I agree with @rizka10 in comment #89.
The second version of Lichess' official statement says:
"What about Round Robin?
We'd like to add it, but unfortunately Round Robin doesn't work online.
The reason is that it has no fair way of dealing with people leaving the tournament early. We cannot expect that all players will play all their games in an online event. It just won't happen, and as a result most Round Robin tournaments would be flawed and unfair, which defeats their very reason to exist.
The closest you can get to Round Robin online is to play a Swiss tournament with a very high number of rounds. Then all possible pairings will be played before the tournament ends."
These words transmit the idea that the Round Robin tournaments were discarded in a categorical way and forever.
But who says that the Round Robins should be implemented as quickly as the Swiss tournaments?
I suspect that the developers of Lichess assumed that they had to proceed as rapidly as with the Swiss tournaments.
This idea overwhelmed them because it involves doing a lot of work in a very short time.
Consequently, they made the above-mentioned statement instead of modifying the first version of the official Lichess statement to express something like this:
"What about Round Robin?
Yes, we're working on it! (It will take some time, but it will arrive)"
The arguments against the feasibility of Round Robin tournaments are unfounded.
Popularity of the Round Robin? This post has 1898 views and 88 comments. And it only inaugurated three days ago! You don't think this is popular?
I prefer that the developers of Lichess tell us:
<< For now we are overwhelmed with so much work, we feel tired and in a bad humor. Round Robin represents a challenge that we don't want to take on at the moment. Can you (Lichess users) be patient and wait a few months? We promise you that we will, but not now. We will keep you informed of our progress. Thank you for your understanding! >>
The second version of Lichess' official statement says:
"What about Round Robin?
We'd like to add it, but unfortunately Round Robin doesn't work online.
The reason is that it has no fair way of dealing with people leaving the tournament early. We cannot expect that all players will play all their games in an online event. It just won't happen, and as a result most Round Robin tournaments would be flawed and unfair, which defeats their very reason to exist.
The closest you can get to Round Robin online is to play a Swiss tournament with a very high number of rounds. Then all possible pairings will be played before the tournament ends."
These words transmit the idea that the Round Robin tournaments were discarded in a categorical way and forever.
But who says that the Round Robins should be implemented as quickly as the Swiss tournaments?
I suspect that the developers of Lichess assumed that they had to proceed as rapidly as with the Swiss tournaments.
This idea overwhelmed them because it involves doing a lot of work in a very short time.
Consequently, they made the above-mentioned statement instead of modifying the first version of the official Lichess statement to express something like this:
"What about Round Robin?
Yes, we're working on it! (It will take some time, but it will arrive)"
The arguments against the feasibility of Round Robin tournaments are unfounded.
Popularity of the Round Robin? This post has 1898 views and 88 comments. And it only inaugurated three days ago! You don't think this is popular?
I prefer that the developers of Lichess tell us:
<< For now we are overwhelmed with so much work, we feel tired and in a bad humor. Round Robin represents a challenge that we don't want to take on at the moment. Can you (Lichess users) be patient and wait a few months? We promise you that we will, but not now. We will keep you informed of our progress. Thank you for your understanding! >>
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.