FICS Teamleague

Board

Teamleague Forum

Team pairings controversyT50Index ->

posted at 2012-05-07 16:37 by wmahan

Today a player was complaining in channel 101 that the way teams were paired in T50 put his team at an unfair disadvantage. I would like to explain why I don't agree.

In the past, TL admins created the complete schedule of team matchups by hand before each edition of TL. After all teams were entered, we would use a table of round-robin pairings and enter each team matchup, in a fairly long and tedious process. To make things easier, jaberwock, smallblackcat, and I divided up the work in recent editions.

For T50, I wrote a script that generates the team pairings automatically, eliminating that tedious work for us. My script was based on the round-robin table at http://home.comcast.net/~wporter211/realsite/chess_etc/rrpair.htm, which gives the following pairings:

Round 1: 1-8 7-2 6-3 5-4
Round 2: 8-5 4-6 3-7 2-1
Round 3: 2-8 1-3 7-4 6-5
Round 4: 8-6 5-7 4-1 3-2
Round 5: 3-8 2-4 1-5 7-6
Round 6: 8-7 6-1 5-2 4-3
Round 7: 4-8 3-5 2-6 1-7

In sections with 7 teams, I considered 8 to be the bye.

Today in channel 101, a player on a #1 seeded team objected to the pairings after his team had lost to the #2 seeded team in round 2. He said that in the past, the #1 team had white on the top board when playing the #2 team, whereas in T50, because of the "2-1" in the table above, the #2 team has white on the top board in round 2.

My response to this claim is that having white on the top board gives no real advantage, because in all cases, a team plays 2 boards with white and 2 boards with black. And even if it did (for the sake of argument) give some tiny advantage, that advantage should be randomized, rather than always going to the top-seeded team.

After the issue came up, it was pointed out in channel 101 that the TL statutes specify a different pairing table from the the one above (see http://teamleague.org/schedules.php). I did not realize that when writing the pairings script, and it was not pointed out until today.

Even before I wrote my script, we have not always followed the table in the statutes exactly. One reason is when two teams from the same "superteam" land in the same section, we try to pair them in the first round, to avoid any possible accusations of collusion in later rounds. My script was designed to take into account such considerations.

The player complaining about the pairings accused me of intentionally altering the pairings to disadvantage his team and to benefit my own team. Because I put a lot of volunteer effort into TeamLeague, especially to ensure it is run in transparent and fair way, I find that accusation disturbing, and it is of course completely false.

However, I plan to change the pairings script to generate the pairings according to the table in the statutes for future editions. Not because I think there is anything unfair about the pairings for T50; rather, I think it is important to follow the rules as precisely as possible.

-- Wil

posted at 2012-05-07 16:45 by Funkmaus

In addiction, I can say that I have seen that topic running by that player not only in the channel 101, but also in whispers to different TL games for 2 days straight in the row.
I have been having hard time trying to calm him down - without any success.
Noone in Teamleague wanted disadvantage his team and it is a strong accussation against people who volounteer their time to run the league.
OTB, in round Robins, pairings are done the way Wil posted, but before the tournament begins, a random seed procedure takes place.
This random seed could be done in TL too - but would it be "trusted".
Imho it would only open more discussion and cause further complains.
--Jenny

posted at 2012-05-07 18:13 by malcovich

This is ludicrous! I admit I did bring it up and I did find it was unfair for my team; I NEVER accused you of doing it to favour your team. I specificly said that for 2 days I was sent left and right to find an answer and not taken seriously. All I wanted was to find out why it was changed and I finally did get an answer. I then argued that without explanation sudden changes like this that do need to be exposed for all to see so that no "cheating" or behind the curtain politics arise. I will accept a punishment but please at least be fair! : I did not accuse you of doing it on purpose...I just explained how it could be perceived that way ESPECIALLY since you seemed unwilling to bring it up when I asked. If I mentioned it for 2 days it is because I got sent left and right with no clear answer and my hope was by bringing it up in a tl game it would catch the attention of someone who new (felt like!) answering me!.

Again I am passed for the bad guy with no one understanding or trying to accept my point. Very well.

Malcovich

posted at 2012-05-07 18:17 by malcovich

I forgot to add, by the way it was done before where the pairings were done via ratings (like is done EVERYWHERE in chess tournaments) we did not have to "trust" that tds did a fair job even though they are very implicated in that section...you are rated higher you had that schedule etc. No chance of cheating, or doing something to get an advantage. Now, by changing the rules and not sharing it with the "normal" (not on td board) teamleaguer you risk this happening. All I ask is consistency and respect to our team which has won the last 2 titles and now is treated as bottom feeders! Never accused; just made my point in my usual "clumbsy" way.

Malcovich

posted at 2012-05-08 03:12 by smallblackcat

I am curious to know what the supposed change is meant to be, and in particular what it means for pairings to have been 'done via ratings'. After all, I handled the task of pairings for TL for much of the last 3 years, and can't see how wmahan's pairings system differs from the one I was using. The only difference, in my opinion, is that they are now done by a program, rather than having to be manually entered by a TD. This change would tend to improve the impartiality of the process, not the other way around.

posted at 2012-05-08 18:34 by jaberwock

"...for 2 days I was sent left and right to find an answer and not taken seriously..."

Surprising that you never approached the chief TD or left me a message.