Grant Szuveges

I dont normally post anything on chess forums that is not MCC related, but I feel very strongly about this particular issue.

Personally I think that accelerated pairings are ridiculous full stop. Regardless whether one accelerates 1 round, 2 rounds, 6 rounds or even the whole touranament, accelerated pairings simply violate 2 very important, fundamental principles of which the Swiss system is based:

1. In a Swiss system, one is supposed to play a player on the same score as oneself (if possible).

2. The Swiss system is based on the concept of top half vs bottom half. Acceleration completely violates this concept.

If people want to run a Swiss style tournament, then run a real Swiss - if not, then run tournaments of a different format (round robins, sectionalised tournaments, knockouts etc - there are lots of different formats to choose from).

My main reasons for liking the "real Swiss" type tournaments are as follows:

1. As Igor Goldenberg points out, weaker players subsidize stronger ones, and a Swiss allows weaker players the chance to play stronger ones. This is really important to many weaker players. I remember when I was rated about 1500 (top of the bottom half at the time), I used to love playing Johansen or players like that in the first round of tournaments. I was lucky enough to play Johansen in the first round of 2 tournaments in 3 months. Its a great experience for players of that level.

2. I actually like the "junk games". I firmly believe that if a player wants to play against strong players, then they should earn that right by beating weaker players first - and that also goes for the strong players themselves. Not only are they giving back to chess (see point 1), but they are also giving themselves a chance to work themselves into form or even test out new openings. Even calling them "junk games" is a bit odd actually. I remember losing my first round (as the higher seed), 3 tournaments in a row once! And Igor (amongst quite a few others) could only draw in round one of the MCC Cup Weekender (a "real" Swiss). In other sports (such as cricket), players earn the right to play strong players by moving up divisions. In chess, a Swiss system allows players to earn this "right" by beating weaker players first. I also like the fact that strong players still have to "prove" that they can beat the weaker players too.

3. Acceleration doesnt even eliminate the "junk games" anyway. Eg, in a field of 80 players, in a normal Swiss, 1 plays 41, 2 plays 42, 3 plays 43 etc. If we accelerate the first round then 1 plays 21, 2 plays 22 etc and 41 plays 61, 42 plays 62 etc:

Lets say that 1 is rated 2300, 2 is 2285, 3 is 2276 and 21 is 1750, 22 is 1743 and 41 is 1505, 42 is 1500, 43 is 1487 and 61 is 1280, 62 is 1275 etc. Now in a normal swiss 1 vs 41 (2300 vs 1505) is considered a junk game and so is 21 vs 61 (1750 vs 1280). So, if all the results go according to plan, then in round 2, the pairings will be basically the players from 21-40 who lost vs the players from 41 -60 who won. Therefore we have 21 vs 41 (1750 vs 1505) Some may even call this a junk game although I wouldnt say so. The problem is though, that inevitably there will be some upsets in round one of an accelerated tournament. In my hypothetical example, lets say that player 62 (1275) beats player 42 (1500) in round 1, and then in round 2, defeats player 38 (1530) who lost round one to player 18. Player 62 (1275) has beaten a few players 200 rating points higher - thats great but then the acceleration comes off, and then we have players rated 1275 playing 2200 players on the top boards in round 3!!! And we want to avoid "junk games"??????? Meanwhile, player 38 (rated 1530 - who lost to player 62 in round 2), is on 0/2 and playing someone rated 900 on the bottom boards - another "junk game"...... Acceleration doesnt avoid "junk games" at all, it simply moves them to more illogical times during a tournament.....

As I said earlier, why run a Swiss when it isnt being run like a Swiss?

In my opinion, the Swiss system is the best way to run a tournament of any individual sport or game that I have even seen - its even good for team games. But it is best for individual games. Imagine tennis was run as a Swiss - if Marat Safin lost the first round, he could still recover and play Leyton Hewitt in the final round for the first prize.... Its a great system full stop, not just for chess, and in my opinion, it is also the fairest way to run a tournament for all of the participants equally. Part of the success of this is the simplicity of it all - its based on principles which are simple and good (eg. play someone on the same score as yourself, top half vs bottom half on that score etc) and can be big or small and you will still get a winner. Eg, even if there were no draws at all in a 7 round Swiss with 128 players, it is still successful as follows:

After round 7, one player on 7
After round 6, 2 players on 6
After round 5, 4 players on 5
After round 4, 8 players on 4
After round 3, 16 players on 3
After round 2, 32 players on 2
After round 1, 64 players on 1

This means that even with no draws, a 128 player tournament can still get a single winner - but the reality is that draws will happen, therefore the number of players could be much higher.

The Swiss system is a great invention and is a fair and level playing field for all players. There is nothing wrong with it as it is, and if it is not broken, dont fix it.....

(these are my own views - not those of the MCC)

__________________
People who have nothing to hide post using their real names...