Gary Gifford wrote on Sat, Apr 19, 2008 02:21 PM UTC:
Jianying Ji, thanks for the great link, a lot there. And I read there about a problem with the 3-1-0 system. It involves draw/win swapping! Yes, that is terrible. I can see that happening when young Bobby Fischer played in tournaments against many Russians. He had complained about them drawing then, but under this 3-1-0 system, collusion would hurt him even more in the rankings (assuming what he said was true). Of course, I've seen people buy wins and get an unearned 1 point. And a player once tried paying me to throw a game so he would win... made me all the more glad that I crushed him like the chess bug he was.
Regarding the 3-1-0 flaw see:
http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4209
I am again thinking that since we are below the GM level, it might be best to keep the 1-0-1/2 system.
There is a Bruce Harper proposal that I like a lot. If there is a draw, a new game is played using the remaining clock times. If that game is drawn, a new game is played using remaining clock times, etc. Finally someone will win, even if by time default. That is great for over-the-board... but many who like to get the most out of their clock time would likely not like this. It would likely tend to speed chess up so that, in the event of a draw, a player would have some descent time for the next possible game. Harper's system doesn't seem meaningful to correspondence games.
Regarding the 3-1-0 flaw see:
http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4209
I am again thinking that since we are below the GM level, it might be best to keep the 1-0-1/2 system.
There is a Bruce Harper proposal that I like a lot. If there is a draw, a new game is played using the remaining clock times. If that game is drawn, a new game is played using remaining clock times, etc. Finally someone will win, even if by time default. That is great for over-the-board... but many who like to get the most out of their clock time would likely not like this. It would likely tend to speed chess up so that, in the event of a draw, a player would have some descent time for the next possible game. Harper's system doesn't seem meaningful to correspondence games.