Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Titled Players Invitational Tournament!

TD: CHARLES_FREY Started on May 25, 2010 at 2:55 PM
Players: 48   Time Control: 10 days/move
Max Group Size: 4   Rating Range: Open
# Advance: 2   Tie Breaks: Yes
Points Available: 733   Games Rated: Yes

This is a "No Vacation" tournament!

88% COMPLETE!
Tournament Stats
Starting Players: 48 Completed Games: 213 (tournament is 88% complete)
Eliminated Round 1: 24 (50% of field) Games in Round 1: 144
Eliminated Round 2: 12 (25% of field) Games in Round 2: 66
Eliminated Round 3: 0 (0% of field) Games in Round 3: 18 (16% completed)
Players Withdrawn: 3 (6%) # Timeouts: 104 (48%)
Remaining Players: 11 (22%) Remaining Games: 15 (current round)
Average Rating: 2188 Biggest Upset: 1960 defeats 2272

Welcome to the Titled Players Invitational Tournament!

Players will compete for the following cash prizes:

First Place: $200.00 USD
Second Place: $100.00 USD
Third Place: $50.00 USD
Fourth Place: $25.00 USD

Time Control: 10 days per move, to minimize the chance of timing out, but players will not be allowed to use vacation time.

Number of Players: 48
Group Size: 4
Advance Per Group: 2
Concurrent Games Per Opponent: 1
Rating Range: Titled Players
Game Type: Standard Chess
Games are RATED.
This is an INVITE ONLY tournament.

Tie Breaks: Players with same point totals advance or win their group. The Neustadl score will be used to determine tie breaks: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonneborn-Berger_system

The tournament will start automatically when registration is full.

If you have any questions, or need assistance, please let me know.

Sincerely,

Charles Frey
Tournament Director
Titled Players Invitational Tournament
Chess.com


Comments


  • 4 years ago

    NM fpawn

    Considering that nearly 2 months passed without response to my question, I can safely say that nobody is watching the tournament.  It just makes me wonder how many players will still be around when round 2 begins late in 2011 or 2012.  After four months of play, two of my matches are on moves 15 and 17!  In the first game!

    Too bad that Charles Frey did a hook and run on us. :-(

    Michael Aigner

  • 4 years ago

    NM fpawn

    What happened to Charles Frey's account?  Apparently it was closed.  All of Charles' comments in this thread have vanished. 

    So... Is anyone overseeing the tournament now?

  • 4 years ago

    NM BMcC333

    Sounds good! Thanks for the support fpawn.

  • 4 years ago

    NM fpawn

    Gee whiz, giving three players 2 whites and the last guy 3 blacks makes no sense at all.  I don't need to know about Crenshaw tables to understand that.  Frankly, it sounds to me like a simple bug (or a programmer working at 2am) that can be easily fixed for future quads.  Did anyone contact Erik or his staff yet?

    Michael Aigner

  • 4 years ago

    NM BMcC333

    That said, I am leaning toward playing because it would give my quad an advantage. I still do not think it is too much to ask for an assurance that normally accepted pairings will be the norm here, especially 3 colors in a row only when absolutely neccessary. We all overlook things.

  • 4 years ago

    NM BMcC333

    I never said you couldn't make up your own set of rules, just that is was annoying to track each sites special rules. Usually you only find out when it is too late, such as not being able to claim a draw against 2 knights or being saddled with 3 blacks in a row. Who wants to learn a new set of rules for every web site? Why do these sites think they know chess rules better than Goichberg when it becomes obvious the reverse it true.  

    Although Goichberg does not state it explicitly in the same paragraph you quote, it is covered very clearly. The very sentence before 30F ends with see also Chapter 12, round robin pairings.

    When you turn to page 12, it makes it very clear: page 293, does state it clearly and unequivocably, "These charts are to be used for round robin tournaments"!

    A double round robin is still a round robin. IMO, any event that wants to be respectable should follow the America rules. This is not a correspondence event, imo, there are no stamps or mail involved. It is an internet game with a long time control.  By 1st stating that the paragraph on 3 blacks did not apply, it appears you meant other rules would apply.

     There it gives 1:4 and 2-3 for rd 1, 3-1 4-2 for rd 2 and 1-2 3-4 for rd 4.

     

    I can accept the argument you want your own server rules, although I see no way I would consider playing another event under ground rules. I do not accept the argument that your methods conform to rule 30f, the parings for round robins, where your interpretation does not stand up to chapter 12.

  • 4 years ago

    NM BMcC333

    I would like some assurance this won't happen in the future. Three blacks in a row are not just inconvenient, they are illegal unless completely unavoidable. A chess server can make their own house rules and all do, but when they ignore the rule book, it stops being chess and becomes some site specific variant.

    On page 151, rule 29E5f it clearly states: No player shall be assigned the same color 3 times in  a row unless there is no other reasinable way to pair the score group or unless neccessary to equalize colors.

    This is not an option or alternate method. 3 in a row is illegal! Neither exception applies here. We have a rule book so players do not have to listen to someone explain why their breaking of the rules is acceptable, no matter how strange. Certainly all ground rules MUST be announced in advance.

    Page 168 of the rule book even suggests how to get around 3 blacks, when the official tables for round robins are used, which is not the case here.

    To show you are not alone, there is another chess server who refuses to accept the fact 2 knights against a king is a draw.

  • 4 years ago

    NM BMcC333

    I was encouraged by Matt's apologetic and prompt response at customer service, but to me these illegal pairings should cause the affected quads to be repaired. I certainly will never play in another event where this is possible.

  • 4 years ago

    NM BMcC333

    3 blacks to start is completely ridiculous and unnecessary. I see there were many quads that were paired normally with everyone getting 2 of 1 color and 1 of another. Whoever designed this pairing program is not a serious chessplayer. I have played many team games with these long time controls, black requires at least 150% more effort than white. It is a major handicap to have 3 blacks at once. If there was some reason this should happen, which there isn't, it should happen to the lowest rated person. It happened to me on bd 3 and a bd 1 besides the other person here. I find "the computer did it" a completely inadequte excuse. The rule book has clear pairing guidelines, and quads should be kindergarten level simplicity not rule breaking complexity. I have not played a move yet and it is everything I can do to not withdraw.

  • 4 years ago

    IM Vlad_Akselrod

    Thanks for the prompt reply, Charles! Much appreciated.

  • 4 years ago

    IM Vlad_Akselrod

    I wonder why I have Black in all the 3 games...

Back to Top