Board
Teamleague Forum
posted at 2020-10-27 20:20 by smallblackcat
At the deadline, we have 26 teams entered (jaberwock will process them tomorrow). Once again, I am seeking input about how to arrange sections. As people cannot yet see the teams, perhaps this can be considered a thought experiment under the 'veil of ignorance'.
I intend to make a final decision at around 0:00 on Friday, server time (i.e. about two days from now).
I intend to make a final decision at around 0:00 on Friday, server time (i.e. about two days from now).
posted at 2020-10-27 22:33 by kurumim
Thanks for the info, sbc, and for opening this for discussion again.
Same number (26) as last season, which is good – no decrease. As for suggestions under the veil of ignorance, it could be 4-4-6-6-6 again or a scheme with 7-8 teams (e.g., 4-7-8-7), but you have to see if there's one or two teams too far away from the others in any section, or any clashes. I assume we don't have any new team above 2100, and there should be like 5-6 teams below or around 1700 – if there are 7, that's just ideal.
Cheers,
Beto.
Same number (26) as last season, which is good – no decrease. As for suggestions under the veil of ignorance, it could be 4-4-6-6-6 again or a scheme with 7-8 teams (e.g., 4-7-8-7), but you have to see if there's one or two teams too far away from the others in any section, or any clashes. I assume we don't have any new team above 2100, and there should be like 5-6 teams below or around 1700 – if there are 7, that's just ideal.
Cheers,
Beto.
posted at 2020-10-27 22:59 by schachbjm
Just to inform anyone. MKM split up in two teams, so there will be a new Fischer Section team.
posted at 2020-10-27 23:03 by kurumim
Thanks, bjm, that changes the scenario completely and there should be schemes more appropriate than those I suggested above.
posted at 2020-10-27 23:10 by schachbjm
Just to inform anyone. MKM split up in two teams, so there will be a new Fischer Section team.
posted at 2020-10-27 23:43 by kurumim
As 5 is a bad number and central sections are more balanced, 6-7-7-6 is the first scheme that comes to mind after the info given by BJM.
posted at 2020-10-27 23:50 by prezandy
Hello, just an adding to discussion: both in TL78 and TL79 there were late entries accepted. I can imagine the same also now. 26 teams, so the same of last season is already good, but with changes in Fischer mentioned by BJM the picture is getting more complicated of course. And late entry of any team will change everything and even may help in creating sections.
posted at 2020-10-28 05:25 by KRMCHESS
Well just for Mysterious Moves we have 6 teams. 2 teams are 2200+ that will be Fischer. I have 3 teams around 1800ish where clashes shouldn't matter too much and 1 team at 1650ish that I hope won't be in the same section as my other teams.
As far as sections go without rating information it's hard to give good splits
As far as sections go without rating information it's hard to give good splits
posted at 2020-10-28 11:16 by pchesso
5-6-5-4-6 or something similar. Keep rating gaps as small as possible. That is, don't e.g. expose Non-Fischer teams to Fischer.
posted at 2020-10-28 12:05 by KRMCHESS
Well for Fischer Section I think my preference would be for it to have 6 teams if possible. Having said that I think it is important that the 6th team that would be moved up gets the right to veto that and if they object then it's a 5 team section for Fischer. Maybe a nicer way of phrasing it is that 6th highest rated team is invited to enter the Fischer Section and they can choose to accept or decline it.
Maybe something like a 5-7-7-7 split could work with potentially Fischer being a double round robin but this is merely speculation based upon incomplete information. I'll also add that since MM have entered 2 extra teams this season that either 2 teams have dropped out or we'll get 2 late entries.
Maybe something like a 5-7-7-7 split could work with potentially Fischer being a double round robin but this is merely speculation based upon incomplete information. I'll also add that since MM have entered 2 extra teams this season that either 2 teams have dropped out or we'll get 2 late entries.
posted at 2020-10-28 17:51 by pchesso
28 teams have just been approved? Awesome!
I like KRMCHESS' idea to allow a team to opt in for Fischer.
Suggestion: 6-8-7-7, if (1) marjohn's team is okay with the Fischer section, and if (2) resolving the player clash (remove Kenzaburo) doesn't hurt the Mysterious Moves.
There may be more player clashes with 6-8-7-7, though, I haven't checked.
Good chess to all teams!
I like KRMCHESS' idea to allow a team to opt in for Fischer.
Suggestion: 6-8-7-7, if (1) marjohn's team is okay with the Fischer section, and if (2) resolving the player clash (remove Kenzaburo) doesn't hurt the Mysterious Moves.
There may be more player clashes with 6-8-7-7, though, I haven't checked.
Good chess to all teams!
posted at 2020-10-28 18:01 by smallblackcat
We got the two late entries, so it's 28 in total. Teams page is up to date now. I'll just note that we can't do a 5-team double round-robin as that would take 10 weeks. Even 7-team sections with playoffs take us right into the last week of December. I'm not sure how people feel about potentially playing over the Christmas period, but we frequently play over other religious festivals (Ramadan, Diwali, Easter etc) and no-one has ever complained. Also of course people have some freedom in scheduling around these occasions.
posted at 2020-10-28 18:14 by smallblackcat
Feel free to ask about potential clashes btw, as I can quickly check them. For a 7/7/7/7 split there would be two: kenzoburo (MKM, LightSpartans), and Mcstorytaller (MRM, TrickyMove)
posted at 2020-10-28 20:46 by kurumim
6-8-7-7 has the same clashes as 7-7-7-7 plus cofail in WWW and Singularity. 5-8-8-7 eliminates the clash for kenzaburo. It's worth noting that having 7 teams in the last section instead of 8 avoids other two clashes (ascoliloko and Hathkhola in MknM and MPM).
I like both 6-8-7-7 and 7-7-7-7; a 5-team Fischer is not as interesting, but I totally understand a preference for it.
I like both 6-8-7-7 and 7-7-7-7; a 5-team Fischer is not as interesting, but I totally understand a preference for it.
posted at 2020-10-28 22:31 by schachbjm
At first glance, I really like 6/6/6/6/4 (have not checked for clashes though). For me, it is important to hear the point of view of LightSpartan. I assume, they can compete in Fischer Section if another 2000+ player joins them. In addition, there needs to be a team welcoming brunftbert, since I doubt that he would like to be paired up 300+ points in all games in his main team.
posted at 2020-10-29 01:46 by marjohn
Hi !
it would be interesting to play in Fischer section but I see that Dan (kenzoburo) is also in MKM, so there might be a conflict there. Also, it would be hard for Stef (brunftbert) to play so higher rated players in all rounds. If there is another 2000+ player available to join us then it would be easier to participate in Fischer section.
So, I would propose to have 4 or 5 teams in Fischer section or put WorldwideWolves instead of us.
I am open to any practical solution.
Take care
john
ps: I am sorry for the late reply but I get NO notifications for the posts here. Thank you pchesso for letting me know about it.
it would be interesting to play in Fischer section but I see that Dan (kenzoburo) is also in MKM, so there might be a conflict there. Also, it would be hard for Stef (brunftbert) to play so higher rated players in all rounds. If there is another 2000+ player available to join us then it would be easier to participate in Fischer section.
So, I would propose to have 4 or 5 teams in Fischer section or put WorldwideWolves instead of us.
I am open to any practical solution.
Take care
john
ps: I am sorry for the late reply but I get NO notifications for the posts here. Thank you pchesso for letting me know about it.
posted at 2020-10-29 05:39 by Krmchess
Well one suggestion I could make is to ask paire who is 2019 to play in the lightspartans team. I'll need to check with him first since it is hypothetical so cannot promise anything. Taking brunftbert shouldn't be a huge issue.
Kenzaburo clash is a bit unfortunate but I can play more to cover and get Kenzaburo to replace me in the lower team.
One thing I'd like to add is that if something like this is wanted it would be pretty important for me to be able to rearrange teams with a rough understanding of sections to avoid clashes. As they are my teams work but if going out my way to help out I'd like to ensure I don't end up too much worse off and can get teams in right sections.
Kenzaburo clash is a bit unfortunate but I can play more to cover and get Kenzaburo to replace me in the lower team.
One thing I'd like to add is that if something like this is wanted it would be pretty important for me to be able to rearrange teams with a rough understanding of sections to avoid clashes. As they are my teams work but if going out my way to help out I'd like to ensure I don't end up too much worse off and can get teams in right sections.
posted at 2020-10-29 06:58 by kurumim
KRM, I imagine you've put a lot of effort into forming those six squads and I wouldn't ask you to rearrange anything, or brunftbert and paire to swap teams. Five teams in a section is never great, but we can live with it – in T77 it was Kasparov that had to settle for it, now it's Fischer. Just wonder if everybody is comfortable with 5-8-8-7?
posted at 2020-10-29 07:58 by kurumim
Alright, after ages without seeing tseltzer on FICS I just got to talk to him and he's looking for a team, so maybe he can join LS (told him to contact marjohn). This was really out of the blue.
posted at 2020-10-29 08:04 by tseltzer
I am looking to participate in this TL, and would be honored to play on a team with marjohn. I do note, however, my TL is under 1900. So, based on the discussion above, I might mess things up!
posted at 2020-10-29 08:35 by marjohn
Hi all,
I just got a notification fron Dan (kenzaburo ) that he will no play in this TL so if tseltzer will join us then we will solve the problem of 'mutual player' but our average rating will be much lower to join Fischer section.
Wellcome aboard tseltzer!!
Take care
John
I just got a notification fron Dan (kenzaburo ) that he will no play in this TL so if tseltzer will join us then we will solve the problem of 'mutual player' but our average rating will be much lower to join Fischer section.
Wellcome aboard tseltzer!!
Take care
John
posted at 2020-10-29 08:41 by KRMCHESS
Well from what I've heard kenzaburo may well be withdrawing from TL80 (at least from my team) so I think that may lean it more towards Spassky for LightSpartans especially if Marjohn needs to find a replacement (tseltzer seems the prime candidate) as it would lower average rating quite a bit.
As far as rearranging teams goes having 6 teams does mean if anyone can rearrange teams it's me. While it is easier to maintain status quo if it is for the good of the running of the league I'm happy to help out if I can. Only real concern I have is that some players have asked to play in 3 teams and I need to make sure I can fit them in 3 teams based on sections.
I'm quite keen on 4 teams in lowest section so would maybe propose
5-7-4-4-4-4
As far as rearranging teams goes having 6 teams does mean if anyone can rearrange teams it's me. While it is easier to maintain status quo if it is for the good of the running of the league I'm happy to help out if I can. Only real concern I have is that some players have asked to play in 3 teams and I need to make sure I can fit them in 3 teams based on sections.
I'm quite keen on 4 teams in lowest section so would maybe propose
5-7-4-4-4-4
posted at 2020-10-29 08:49 by marjohn
So, smallblackcat lets do this please:
- remove kenzaburo
- add tseltzer
- recalculate our average rating
- form a new Fischer section
Let me know if I have to do anythin for the above.
J
- remove kenzaburo
- add tseltzer
- recalculate our average rating
- form a new Fischer section
Let me know if I have to do anythin for the above.
J
posted at 2020-10-29 09:11 by KRMCHESS
:TeamLeague(TD):
:Information for the given players:
:
:marjohn joined. Rating is: 2187
:rgpchess joined. Rating is: 2096
:tseltzer joined. Rating is: 1948
:brunftbert joined. Rating is: 1744
:
:Average of the top 4 players is: 1993.75
FYI
You can add players at http://teamleague.org/dropadd.php or via Captains Page and then request changes
:Information for the given players:
:
:marjohn joined. Rating is: 2187
:rgpchess joined. Rating is: 2096
:tseltzer joined. Rating is: 1948
:brunftbert joined. Rating is: 1744
:
:Average of the top 4 players is: 1993.75
FYI
You can add players at http://teamleague.org/dropadd.php or via Captains Page and then request changes
posted at 2020-10-29 09:15 by blore
Sorry for the delayed reply (still a few hours before the 00:00 Friday deadline that smallblackcat is thinking of). Also thanks to pchesso for alerting me about this thread via message on FICS.
Things have changed since that message was sent, but if the proposals for possibly including WorldwideWolves in Fischer Section is still on, the team is willing and eager to play. We have played in Fischer once or twice, and this time the general level is a bit higher than WWW, but we dont see that as a reason not to try and raise our level and compete.
cheers.
blore
on behalf of WWW
Things have changed since that message was sent, but if the proposals for possibly including WorldwideWolves in Fischer Section is still on, the team is willing and eager to play. We have played in Fischer once or twice, and this time the general level is a bit higher than WWW, but we dont see that as a reason not to try and raise our level and compete.
cheers.
blore
on behalf of WWW
posted at 2020-10-29 09:33 by kurumim
Thanks a lot, blore – so we do get 6 in Fischer after all. And Spassky is more balanced now, so I repeat the suggestion made by pchesso: 6-8-7-7.
I'm also happy that tseltzer quickly found a new team. :)
I'm also happy that tseltzer quickly found a new team. :)
posted at 2020-10-29 09:41 by marjohn
thank you KRM !
Kurumim 6-8-7-7 looks fine to me as well
j
Kurumim 6-8-7-7 looks fine to me as well
j
posted at 2020-10-29 10:02 by Turamon
I would love to do bigger sections with playoffs and as far as my teams are concerned I don't think that playing during Christmas or even New Years eve should be a big problem. since the time to arrange a game is six days or with extension even more that should not be a problem at all.
posted at 2020-10-29 10:05 by KRMCHESS
One reason I'm not too keen on the 6-8-7-7 is that mcstorytaller is in 4 teams this season - Mysterious_Pawn_Moves (26th), TrickyMove (18th), Mysterious_Rook_Moves (16th) and Singularity (11th).
I can interchange him with a player in Mysterious_Knight_Moves (19th) or Mysterious_Bishop_Moves (17th).
So that for example with a 6-6-4-4-4-4 structure I can get following
Singularity - 2nd Section
Mysterious_Rook_Moves - 3rd Section
TrickyMove - 4th Section
Mysterious_Knight_Moves - 5th Section available
Mysterious_Pawn_Moves - 6th Section
As you can see I do have scope to handle a 6-6-8-4-4 scenario or I guess a 6-8-6-4-4
Also if the WWW is willing to play in the Fischer Section that is great and I hope they do well. It's a generous offer and it is the best way to improve as facing stronger players means you can become stronger.
I can interchange him with a player in Mysterious_Knight_Moves (19th) or Mysterious_Bishop_Moves (17th).
So that for example with a 6-6-4-4-4-4 structure I can get following
Singularity - 2nd Section
Mysterious_Rook_Moves - 3rd Section
TrickyMove - 4th Section
Mysterious_Knight_Moves - 5th Section available
Mysterious_Pawn_Moves - 6th Section
As you can see I do have scope to handle a 6-6-8-4-4 scenario or I guess a 6-8-6-4-4
Also if the WWW is willing to play in the Fischer Section that is great and I hope they do well. It's a generous offer and it is the best way to improve as facing stronger players means you can become stronger.
posted at 2020-10-29 10:45 by kurumim
KRM, it may well be possible for LightKnight to replace mc on board 6 for TrickyMove or even go with 5, and that's the only clash in the whole 6-8-7-7 scheme (with mc keeping 3 spots where he should be fully active). As T76 was the last time we had sections with 7 or 8 teams, I find it interesting to try it again.
posted at 2020-10-29 11:01 by schachbjm
Looking forward to face you WWW!
A 6-teams Fischer Section sounds awesome.
I do not have any strong opinion regarding the creating of the other sections, however I think it is good to do not have too many different formats. Also I think we might run into some scheduling issues during the Christmas period. Therefore my preferred settings are (in that order):
1. 6-6-6-6-4
2. 6-6-4-4-4-4
3. 6-8-7-7
A 6-teams Fischer Section sounds awesome.
I do not have any strong opinion regarding the creating of the other sections, however I think it is good to do not have too many different formats. Also I think we might run into some scheduling issues during the Christmas period. Therefore my preferred settings are (in that order):
1. 6-6-6-6-4
2. 6-6-4-4-4-4
3. 6-8-7-7
posted at 2020-10-29 11:39 by KRMCHESS
Well other aspect that worries me a bit is that I'll have 3 teams in 3rd section and each team has only got 4 players in it. My initial plan was to wait until sections went up and then get players from the other teams to provide cover. I've also got at least two players who have told me they can't play on a specific round that would mean I would have to either default a board or make a player play when they've specifically asked me not to.
If the proposed scheme was 6-8-7-7 I think I would ask to withdraw one of my teams in the 3rd section since otherwise we'll get defaults in best case scenario and in worst case scenario I'm not confident I can fulfill the team's fixtures. 3 teams of 4 players would become 2 teams of 5 with me and mcstorytaller removed.
I'll note that if a 6-8-6-7 split is desired I'm OK with it. It's just that I had a pool of 12 players to make up 3 teams and in smaller sections I can get overlap to provide cover so I can field more teams but in a larger section it's not possible. I'd say I'm 2 to 3 players short to get 3 teams to work in the same section.
If the proposed scheme was 6-8-7-7 I think I would ask to withdraw one of my teams in the 3rd section since otherwise we'll get defaults in best case scenario and in worst case scenario I'm not confident I can fulfill the team's fixtures. 3 teams of 4 players would become 2 teams of 5 with me and mcstorytaller removed.
I'll note that if a 6-8-6-7 split is desired I'm OK with it. It's just that I had a pool of 12 players to make up 3 teams and in smaller sections I can get overlap to provide cover so I can field more teams but in a larger section it's not possible. I'd say I'm 2 to 3 players short to get 3 teams to work in the same section.
posted at 2020-10-29 12:04 by kurumim
OK, I see the issue goes well beyond a single clash. Not sure what works best then, but I hope no team or player needs to withdraw. PreZandy was telling me about how democratic this discussion has been and I totally agree – good and productive spirit of community here.
posted at 2020-10-29 13:00 by KRMCHESS
Basically way I did teams was if let's say 3 people say they can play every round and one person says they can play every round except 1 I figure that's more or less a team and I can add someone once sections are up who is in another section to cover for the remaining round. I did teams on basis that MRM, MBM and MKnM would cover each other.
To be honest it's not disastrous from a personal viewpoint to go down a team as it means I don't have to play an extra game every week (to cover for kenzaburo) and both remaining teams have plenty of cover even without mcstorytaller. So no player would be forced to miss out on TL80 and it would merely be a reorganisation of teams that ensures all our matches can be played and no one is forced to play.
If larger sections are desired I'm OK with it in principle but I was just giving a warning that teams as I'd currently submitted wouldn't be able to handle it so I'd need to tweak them accordingly
To be honest it's not disastrous from a personal viewpoint to go down a team as it means I don't have to play an extra game every week (to cover for kenzaburo) and both remaining teams have plenty of cover even without mcstorytaller. So no player would be forced to miss out on TL80 and it would merely be a reorganisation of teams that ensures all our matches can be played and no one is forced to play.
If larger sections are desired I'm OK with it in principle but I was just giving a warning that teams as I'd currently submitted wouldn't be able to handle it so I'd need to tweak them accordingly
posted at 2020-10-29 15:06 by smallblackcat
Just checking in, and I see there has been much fruitful discussion!
I have a suggestion that I think may resolve things - 6-6-4-6-6. This solution creates no clashes! The one slight issue I see is that the bottom team in the middle section (MRM) would be at a bit of a disadvantage (~60 points below the other teams). Maybe the team can be reinforced later on? This way at least most sections get playoffs. Thoughts?
I have a suggestion that I think may resolve things - 6-6-4-6-6. This solution creates no clashes! The one slight issue I see is that the bottom team in the middle section (MRM) would be at a bit of a disadvantage (~60 points below the other teams). Maybe the team can be reinforced later on? This way at least most sections get playoffs. Thoughts?
posted at 2020-10-29 16:09 by KRMCHESS
Personally I'm not too worried about MRM being 60 points lower especially when WWW have volunteered to play in the Fischer Section where they are 200 points lower.
6-6-4-6-6 is viable for me as MRM, MBM and MKnM aren't all in the same section. I'll also note that for alternative permutations that I have quite a lot of players in the 1700ish range so I should be able to swap them round to avoid clashes. So that for example if we went with a 6-6-6-6-4 I'd just switch mcstorytaller in MRM and Miltie in MKnM that have almost identical ratings to avoid a clash.
I guess the advantage of 6/4 splits is that a DRR for 4 team sections is 6 rounds and 6 team sections would be 5 rounds + playoff and in both scenarios it should be completed before Christmas
6-6-4-6-6 is viable for me as MRM, MBM and MKnM aren't all in the same section. I'll also note that for alternative permutations that I have quite a lot of players in the 1700ish range so I should be able to swap them round to avoid clashes. So that for example if we went with a 6-6-6-6-4 I'd just switch mcstorytaller in MRM and Miltie in MKnM that have almost identical ratings to avoid a clash.
I guess the advantage of 6/4 splits is that a DRR for 4 team sections is 6 rounds and 6 team sections would be 5 rounds + playoff and in both scenarios it should be completed before Christmas
posted at 2020-10-29 16:37 by smallblackcat
6-6-6-6-4 creates only one clash (Mcstorytaller), and creates more natural section splits - the bottom 4 teams are all under 1660, the fifth from bottom team is 1712. So if that's workable for you, I'd be inclined to do that.
posted at 2020-10-29 17:03 by kurumim
Out of all the combos with 4 and 6 teams, 6-6-4-6-6 may be the best as it should please everybody. That was a clever solution, sbc. Even the three Rangers squads get separated.
Capablanca would be much more balanced with 4 teams, of course, but Turamon and I think also Yavchess would prefer playoffs there.
I was thinking about all the explanation given by KRM and as an exercise I considered his three 4-player teams becoming two 6-player teams. In that scenario, I'd suggest 6-7-7-7 (instead of the 6-8-6-7 he suggested), with ArchEnemies being the bottom team in Spassky and TheRangers_DesertBroncos being the top team in Kasparov. In the simulations I made, one MM team there would have 1910.75 and the other, 1907.5, so both very close to the top. But again, as you guys came up with other viable solutions without any withdrawing, this is just to share ideas.
Capablanca would be much more balanced with 4 teams, of course, but Turamon and I think also Yavchess would prefer playoffs there.
I was thinking about all the explanation given by KRM and as an exercise I considered his three 4-player teams becoming two 6-player teams. In that scenario, I'd suggest 6-7-7-7 (instead of the 6-8-6-7 he suggested), with ArchEnemies being the bottom team in Spassky and TheRangers_DesertBroncos being the top team in Kasparov. In the simulations I made, one MM team there would have 1910.75 and the other, 1907.5, so both very close to the top. But again, as you guys came up with other viable solutions without any withdrawing, this is just to share ideas.
posted at 2020-10-29 18:25 by KRMCHESS
I can confirm that 6-6-6-6-4 is workable for me since it's a straightforward swap and easy to do.
Also as far as reworked teams went in the hypothetical scenario where 3 teams were combined into 2 I actually ended up having them at around 1860ish each with 5 players in each team (mcstorytaller would have a clash and I would play in Fischer only). I suspect ratings for kurumim's simulations were boosted since I was included in reworked teams and that pushed average up quite a bit. I'm unsure if it's still relevent but that is what I had planned in event of a 6-8-6-7 split
Also as far as reworked teams went in the hypothetical scenario where 3 teams were combined into 2 I actually ended up having them at around 1860ish each with 5 players in each team (mcstorytaller would have a clash and I would play in Fischer only). I suspect ratings for kurumim's simulations were boosted since I was included in reworked teams and that pushed average up quite a bit. I'm unsure if it's still relevent but that is what I had planned in event of a 6-8-6-7 split
posted at 2020-10-29 21:17 by marjohn
SBC the 6-6-6-6-4 looks smoothier indeed.
j
j
posted at 2020-10-29 21:20 by smallblackcat
Ok we're going with a 6-6-4-6-6 split. Seems like this will make most people happy.
One minor point I'll take on board for next time is that some captains evidently weren't aware of this discussion until pchesso messaged them specifically (thanks for that, btw). There's a simple fix for next time - I'll post a link to this thread on the homepage.
Once again I appreciate that people engaged in a spirited and principled way in these discussions. Good luck in T80!
One minor point I'll take on board for next time is that some captains evidently weren't aware of this discussion until pchesso messaged them specifically (thanks for that, btw). There's a simple fix for next time - I'll post a link to this thread on the homepage.
Once again I appreciate that people engaged in a spirited and principled way in these discussions. Good luck in T80!
posted at 2020-10-29 21:27 by smallblackcat
Oh just missed marjohn's last comment. To clarify, I saw some benefit in kurumim's point about splitting up the Rangers teams. Also there aren't clear rating discrepancies in the lowest section, if you go board by board. It's something reasonable people can certainly disagree on, but I feel bound to make my reasons clear.