Since we had a very robust discussion last season after I had setup sections, I thought it was better to open this up for debate beforehand this time. There isn't going to be a formal vote or anything, I just want to gauge how people generally feel about this. The final decision will still be mine, and any disagreement with that decision should therefore be directed my way.

We have 24 teams this time, so we have three obvious options: 6 sections of 4-teams with DRR and no playoffs; 4 sections of 6-teams (SRR) with playoffs; or 3 sections of 8-teams (SRR) and playoffs.

I look forward to more robust debate. I'll make the final decision on Thursday at around 22:00 (server time).

Thank you.

My preference, in this order:

4 teams per section
12 teams per section :) (a wonderful experiment that we might try at least once)
8 teams per section
6 teams per section

Any decision you make, is fine with me.

Looking forward. Good chess to everyone!

thanks for the opportunity to speak out before you make a decision, sbc!

I have taken a look at that rating differences and if it's 6 teams/ section that would only make a huge difference in the section with the teams with the highest average. with eight teams/ section this would be different for all sections.

rating difference for eight teams would be close to 400 points rating difference in the top section that is too much in my opinion. it would not be as high in the lower sections but if you compare the four player teams on board four in the lowest 8 teams section with the three top team board fours it would also be a rating difference close to 300 points. I'm all for the chance to win for everyone which is hard to do against an opponent that much higher rated. if that can be avoided by a lower number of teams I'm all for it.

other than that: six teams and ssr makes a five round season with a week or two (additional week to end the normal season?) for the finals. six weeks is something most players could do.

and I'm very much attracted by playoffs to really seal the deal.

Based on the ratings, I think it would be best to do 6 sections of 4-teams with DRR; especially for the highest and lowest rated sections. 4 sections of 6-teams (SRR with playoffs) would work without too many clashes and considerable rating gaps, so it should be taken into account.
I do not support 8-teams sections due to huge rating gaps and numerous clashes.

In addition, I briefly looked at 4-5-5-5-5, but it does not work that good :/

I wanted to see the playoffs back for a change, but clearly 4-team sections work best with the current teams.

Sections with 6 teams would put two teams designed for Spassky in Fischer, plus MQM and MRM would have to deal with a clash on board 1. I noticed several players from last season are taking a break (maybe because of summer in the Northern Hemisphere), so any clash may be critical. In addition to that, 6-team sections offer fewer playing opportunitues – only 5 rounds for most teams, whereas 4-team sections provide all teams with 6 rounds.

Sections with 8 teams are a dream in terms of playing opportunities (7 rounds for everybody + playoffs), but the imbalances would be huge in the first and third sections, so not good. (Schachbjm, I actually didn't catch any clash in this configuration.)

Well I think with the Fischer Section realistically it has to be a 4 team section unless WorldwideWolves and RainbowWarriorsRojo desperately want to play in the Fischer Section (I suspect they don't).

I think 4-4-4-4-4-4 is probably simplest although maybe 4-6-6-4-4 might work as well.

I'll also add that while a 6-6-6-6 would result in a clash for board 1 on MQM and MRM I can relatively easily swap with the board 1 to avoid a clash so while not ideal it's not a disaster for my teams. I think bigger issue is that rating gaps between top and bottom team in 6 section teams is quite big with Fischer = 312.25, Spassky = 118.25, Kasparov = 90.75 and Lasker = 144.5.

Just as a reference assuming a 100 ELO point gap statistically the higher rated player/team should win 55.4%, draw 16.5% and lose 28.1% of the time. A 50 point gap gives the highest rated player/team 47.9% win, 18.1% draw and 34.0% loss. So excluding draws with a 100 point gap higher rated player wins in a 2:1 ratio while with a 50 point gap it is lowered to a 4:3 ratio.

I'll also add that considering that Mysterious_Pawn_Moves is 60 points higher rated than team directly below it and 71.5 points below team 2 above it I doubt it's easily possible to make perfect sections.

Personally I think 4 team sections is the way to go but if others would prefer to try something new I have no objection to trying it out and can handle any required changes for my teams (although 12 team sections would be a disaster)

Since the question of clashes was raised, I thought I might as well share some information: No clashes for 4-team or 8-team sections; 1 clash (PeterTrsavec) for 6-team sections. The 4-6-6-4-4 split also leads to no clashes.

I'm fine with any format. Thanks for taking input.

The double round robin was quite nice - getting a 'rematch' was as good as getting a chance at playoffs for me.

From what I've heard, one of the teams has sent an application for late-join.

I just want to say, that in case of 25 teams, the arrangement 4-7-7-7 can be quite feasible, with reasonable ~100 point gap in middle sections, but with greater impact on the lowest section (~170 point gap), which is not that good of course, but there are pluses and minuses in any solution.

Just going to add that I've just asked to make a couple of changes to my teams as I got a late request to play.

As a result Mysterious Rook Moves has a reduced average from 1894.75 to 1879 and Mysterious Pawn Moves has a reduced average from 1763.5 to 1668.25.

I'll also note that PeterTrsavec clash no longer exists and that potentially a bottom section with 6 teams might work better.

So maybe a 4-4-6-4-6 could work as well as it gives ranges of (2338 to 2148.75), (2033.25 to 1965.00), (1944.00 to 1877.00), (1866.75 to 1793.50) and (1703.75 to 1619.00).

So that gives following ranges: 189.25, 68.25, 67.0, 74.25 and 84.75 assuming changes to my two teams are approved and a 4-4-6-4-6 structure. If a 25th team is approved then figures change again

So we now have a 25th team, and apparently we might still have one more late entry. This throws the various plans outlined into turmoil, though I'll note that these discussions have at least made clear to me what people value in terms of section make-up.
I just want to say, that in case of 25 teams, the arrangement 4-7-7-7 can be quite feasible
This would cause a clash for pingupenguin, and would create a fairly unbalanced bottom section (top team 90 points higher than the rest). Also I don't completely like the idea of Fischer being increasingly treated as a separate entity. This may end up being the least-worst option, but I'm tending towards a more even split of 6-6-7-6, with playoffs for all sections.
Of course, if we get a 26th team before tomorrow, all of this may be moot.

And we now have 26 teams. Options abound at this point, but I'll put in an argument for 7/7/6/6: no clashes; three of the four sections have a >100 point rating spread; the top section features all the 2000> teams; all sections get playoffs. Note that other options with 6 and 7 team sections create clashes.
The main alternative is some kind of 4/4/6/4/4 type split. Main disavantage there is that only one section gets playoffs.
Final decision will be tomorrow at 22:00.

My favorite: 4-6-6-6-4
- manageable spread
- Spassky teams in Spassky section
- Playoffs for Turamon :)

That creates a clash for LNO. Normally such a thing wouldn't be a serious problem, but there's limited time left for captains to resolve clashes. 4/4/6/6/6 does work without clashes though. Also, though Turamon has been most vocal, he's by no means the only TLer who wants the return of playoffs.

As KRM explained above about a possible swap between him and PeterTrsavec, I assume that in case Singularity and MRM fall in the same section he could just swap LNO and gubbengraa, with minimal rating difference.

Following my mate PreZandy's suggestion, I was thinking of something like 4-7-8-7 or 4-8-7-7, but now with MPM in the 1600s RWVerde does look way above all the teams at the bottom. Notice that boards 4 for TheRangersMavericks and nomanchess are much closer to boards 4-5 in the last four teams than to their counterparts in NewBlood/Erythro and RWVerde, so I agree with sbc that 6 makes a lot of sense for the last section.

I wouldn't mind a larger Fischer section at all as long as the teams in the 2000s are OK with it. I'm not crazy about 6-team sections, but 7-6-7-6 is logical indeed: it's basically like teams above 2000, teams in the 1900s, teams in the 1884.25-1793.50 range (<100 points), and teams U1700 with one exception at 1703.75 (gap of less than 100 points again). 4-8-8-6 (clash for mcstorytaller in the second section) is another alternative.

The 4-team double round robin sections in TL78 were fun. I vote for that.

I can confirm that I probably would switch LNO and gubbengraa in the event of a clash. If it's a single player then it's usually not too hard to resolve it especially if I have someone of a similar rating I can do a 1:1 switch with.

As someone with a team in the Fischer Section I can confirm that more teams aren't an issue for Fischer Section teams. However I do know that teams in the low 2000s tend to be quite unhappy ending up in Fischer Section and I believe that encouraged rating manipulation to lower team ratings so someone else was forced up. If captains of two teams who would play up are happy with it the a larger Fischer Section is definitely viable.

4-4-6-6-6 looks better than 4-6-6-6-4 in terms of rating discrepancy, agreed.

Also I don't completely like the idea of Fischer being increasingly treated as a separate entity.

Back in the days of 7-teams sections we had frequently teams scoring 0 - 1.0 match points per season. Quite frequently, this resulted in the disappearance of players/teams.
In contrast, 3 current captains (pchesso, kurumim and me) of Fischer Section teams posted in this thread supporting 4-teams Fischer Section if there are not more teams aiming for Fischer Section. This season we have 6 teams rated above 2000, so I am fine with 6/7-teams section if RW Rojo, MQM and WwW are willing to play in Fischer Section. On the other hand I can understand if they do not take the challenge concerning that there are teams where boards 5/6 are rated the same as their top boards.

Well something approaching consensus has been reached. We'll have a 4-4-6-6-6 split. Most sections get playoffs, there are no massive rating discrepancies, and we have no clashes. Thanks everyone for your suggestions, hope no-one ends up too disappointed.

No disappointment at all, sbc, that's a good solution. :) Thanks for taking everybody's thoughts into account to make your decision, it was a good experience.

I think the sections are pretty good and a 4-4-6-6-6 split was the way to go. One thing I'll mention is that section limits are a bit high in some sections. For example Spassky has teams in 1965 to 2033.25 range but max limit is 2091 while Capablanca section has teams from 1619 to 1703.25 with a max limit of 1748.50.

I guess this is a slight anomaly from picking sections intelligently since if there is a big gap between two teams in order of rating it completely makes sense to make a new section at that point. However if there is a 200 point gap between teams then if a section is made in the gap the lower section will have a max rating 100 points above the highest rated team.

I think every team should be quite competitive and that is main aim when making sections so hopefully everyone will have an enjoyable TL79.