<richardhutnik@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:87037d9b-d69a-4207-96f1-ebe85aa9d093@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Mar 21, 12:33 pm, Peter Clinch <p.j.cli...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>> So why does anyone bother entering? Perhaps because they /like playing
>> Chess/? people who like playing will often like watching, and will
>> appreciate quality play whether or not it ends in a draw. A draw is an
>> outcome reflecting similarly good play on both sides: it is fair and is
>> not necessarily dull.
>>
>> Pete.
>
> What is im****tant to understand is that a tournament is a version of a
> game, and it will get gamed by people to maximize their chances to
> win, irregardless of what each game calls for. If a scoring system
> rewards draws more, there will be more draws. It goes with the
> territory.
>
> - Rich
Good points! In fact, if scores for draws are the same as averaged
win/lose,
then there is no particular emphasis on avoiding draws, or playing for a
win
/in terms of scoring/ - and other factors become im****tant; Andy Walker
mentioned ratings as one factor, and the other is one's position in any
tournament, or how feisty you feel.
To follow the language above - if the scoring system rewards draws with
black more than white, with 0.6 and 0.4 of a point respectively, will that
factor disrupt 2 things? (a) if players collude to draw they do not get
the
same reward , and (b) will it produce less draws overall by stimulating
the
white player to fight on, and not draw?
Phil Innes
|
