Future Zapper Formats?

For discussion pertaining to Chess, Net-Chess, or general interests.
Post Reply
cliff
Posts: 572
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Future Zapper Formats?

Post by cliff » Wed Aug 22, 2012 1:24 pm

Zapper 2013 Format Ideas?


In response to Eugene and a few other players, it may be wise to look at the format for next year's Zapper now. This will give us plenty of time to finalize how we'll continue forth with this amazing annual tribute to Jeff. I, like many others, want the tournament to continue, but I tend to agree with Eugene – we should really have a set format, so there won't be a surprise every year.

I seem to have sensed a few (only a few? criticisms of how I've organized the event over the last three years. Some have been well deserved, and for those I offer my humble apologies. Some, perhaps were not. And those I chalk up to the old adage, “You can't please all of the people all of the time.”

Having said that, I admit that there were some problems with this year's Zapper. - we had a few cancellations and a no-show or two. Those have been common problems with many tournaments, and are certainly not unique! My vision going kaput along with my internet were unique though, at least to me, if not the Zapper. In the 2011 Zapper, Johnrbrown's computer died, along with the Net-Chess server itself! Pumpkin had computer problems in the 2010 Zapper, which also saw Abiodun having to withdraw in the second round, and Jpettit starting a two-year hiatus from the site.

Bottom line is that sometimes it's the little screw ups that make the Zapper so much fun – and I'm quite sure that Jeff would agree.

In the words of the immortal Stan Lee; “'Nuff said!”

Now here's some ideas for next year.

A) The “Classic” Format from the 2010 Zapper -
( Modeled after the Open, it consisted of four tournaments, with 21 players. The top two from each individual tournament advanced to the second round, consisting of two tournaments of four players. The two winners of those tournaments played off for the championship in the third round. As it turned out, Davidwhite and Ramawolf decided to share the Gold Medal without playing.)

B) The 2011 Zapper Madness -
(Four teams of five players in five tournaments, one per board, competed in a three round event. No teams were eliminated, and the cumulative number of points scored decided the winner. Team Tyr took the Gold medal. This was a minor variation of Brian's original team idea, with a few bugs ironed out.)

(Note: the Official Rules and results of these two tournaments can be found in past forum posts.)

C) Classic Revised -
(Instead of three rounds and an open entry – which is why the 2010 Classic had 21 players -
freeze the number of entrants at 20, and have two rounds. Four tournaments of five players each, with the winner of each advancing to a final round two.)

D) 2012 Revised -
(Same as this year, but reduce the number of players to four per team, and perhaps go back to four teams. Two rounds with two games versus each other, cumulative points decide the final winners.)
E) “Handicap” Zapper -
(This option would give the lower rated players a bit of a better chance of victory. For the sake of argument, we'll say Four tournaments of five players each. The pairings would be random, as in the 2010 Classic. Based on the average rating of each tournament, the players below that rating would get handicap points. Let's say a tournament has an average of 2400, for example. For each fifty or a hundred points below that average, a player would receive a “bonus” point, up to a certain maximum handicap. A player rated 2000 would receive two handicap points added to his score, if it was decided that the handicap would be fifty points per hundred below the average. The four winners advance, and the handicap could be halved for the second and final round.)

F) “Elimination match” Zapper -
(Between eighteen and twenty-two players – we need an even number, divisible by two – play matches consisting of two or three games each. The pairings would be either based on rating or random. The winners of each advance and play each other until only two are left. Those two play for the Gold! Heck, I think everyone knows what an elimination match is, so why am I even explaining this one?)

G) “Swiss System” Zapper -
(Why not? Someplace on the computer I have some Swiss System software, or could easily download some by then. The number of rounds would obviously be dependent on the number of entrants. If we had twenty players, we could have two tournaments of ten players, and a deciding round as the top three advance. Round two could be a typical round robin perhaps. It may be a bit shaky here and there, but what the hell? I think we could pull it off.)

---------------------------------------------------


Those are just a few ideas that I've had over the few months of my visual and technological enforced exodus. I hope that one or two of them have some merit, or can be built on. I certainly welcome feedback and now I'll be able to respond to any that are posted. Personally, I like the Handicap and the Swiss ideas best. I'll certainly bow to the will of the majority, however. I think it's time for a break from the Team format, although it did have the advantage of making every player on the victorious team a winner! Unfortunately, all the members of the losing teams were not, so I guess it's nearly impossible to find a way to achieve a perfect balance.

Lastly, and on a personal note I'd like to add one more thing.

I've certainly learned this year that no man is an island, and hence the wisdom of having a good backup who can step in and fill a void in the event of emergencies. In all fairness, Brian made that offer to me, back when all my troubles started here came to a head. I realize now that I should have accepted his offer to help, but I thought he had too many personal matters of his own to contend with. Perhaps together, though, we could have made things a lot smoother, without either of us having to strain our resources. Next year I'll keep a clear line of communication open with him and any other Assistant TD's that are willing to add their help as well. I had foolishly thought that I could keep things going smoothly, even when it became all too apparent that I couldn't.

I've always credited Brian for the Zapper idea though! He had originally made the suggestion in an old forum post, not too long after Jeff's passing. I just took the idea and gave it life. And I'm very proud that I was able to do that!

Cliff

ecperreault
General Forum Grandmaster
Posts: 1139
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 10:41 pm

Re: Future Zapper Formats?

Post by ecperreault » Wed Aug 22, 2012 3:39 pm

Cripes! You could have published all that in a 5-part mini series!
I have a tough time reading words longer than common curse words (Brian sat behind me in reading class).
You got picture books of all this stuff?

ecperreault
General Forum Grandmaster
Posts: 1139
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 10:41 pm

Re: Future Zapper Formats?

Post by ecperreault » Wed Aug 22, 2012 4:03 pm

.
Last edited by ecperreault on Thu Dec 06, 2012 3:25 am, edited 1 time in total.

iamachessstudent
Posts: 380
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 1:35 pm

Re: Future Zapper Formats?

Post by iamachessstudent » Wed Aug 22, 2012 10:08 pm

Im going to vote for B or F also but a poll among all th0ese in the tournament is the democratic way , if you dont get a resounding "yes" to any of the above by individual votes!

A good p0int as mentioned, when the Zapper Reports are done; EVERYONE is fair game, It is not in a bad or hurtful way and it is FUN for God sake so lets have fun!!

I will try and commentate on at least one game and a few positions, depending on feedback or more accurate how I feel, since feed back isnt a very easy thing to ever get around here, if u want serious feedback, i mean...

I will help all i can and will be glad to see the end results!

Jsihus

cliff
Posts: 572
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: Future Zapper Formats?

Post by cliff » Thu Aug 23, 2012 3:30 pm

Thanks, guys!

Duly noted and appreciated!

:)

I only thought about a Poll sometime last night, long after I posted this! But it does seem to be the fairest way of doing things.

One question: If the 2011 Zapper Madness is the way we end up going, should we keep five teams or go back to four? And two Rounds or three? Or just completely stick to four teams and three rounds, as in the 2011 event?

The immense popularity of the four team - three round system as in the 2011 Madness seems to be the choice, as Eugene pointed out. God, was that fun! And thus far it was the easiest to get off the ground!

And as far as Eugene being the OFFICIAL REPORTER, that's great! And certainly, everyone should be fair game. Even me, despite my perfection! :lol:

And I for one always enjoyed your analysis and coverage, Josh! I think many others do also! I've noted, and commented on, the sometimes lack of feedback here too, but since I've been in a position lately where I could do little, maybe I now understand why a lot of players don't. Time constraints may be more of a factor than I could have thought! But, that aside, I'd love to see you both assisting like that!

Now where's Brian?

:?

I'm sure he has a few things to add!

I'll post a poll tomorrow.

- Cliff

ecperreault
General Forum Grandmaster
Posts: 1139
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 10:41 pm

Re: Future Zapper Formats?

Post by ecperreault » Thu Aug 23, 2012 4:40 pm

.
Last edited by ecperreault on Thu Dec 06, 2012 3:25 am, edited 1 time in total.

sour
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 4:20 am

Re: Future Zapper Formats?

Post by sour » Mon Aug 27, 2012 12:52 pm

Cliff,
You may have told me before. What happened to your internet at home? I was thinking that, if your ISP is not the problem, then maybe I or someone in here could give you a hand with the problem. (unless you're just not allowed to have internet at your home anymore...lol) I believe we are all missing out in your absence.

Post Reply