Hi
2024 FIDE World Rapid & Blitz Championships: Official Discussion Thread
Sort:
That would be great.
Jan 12, 2025
0
#545
ChessAGC_YT wrote:
"Hi" be relevant
Frankly, it should be that one needs to be....lets say, 16 yrs old before they have the ability to post comments.
Jan 12, 2025
0
#546
Cornfed wrote:
ChessAGC_YT wrote:
"Hi" be relevant
Frankly, it should be that one needs to be....lets say, 16 yrs old before they have the ability to post comments.
what?
Quiero el logro de publicar mi primer comentario jajaj
Jan 12, 2025
0
#549
ChessAGC_YT wrote:
stop spamming
Gotta 'downvote' and report them and hit the 'spamming' button.
Jan 12, 2025
0
#553
ungewichtet wrote:
SymphonicKnight wrote:
In general, it would seem that being a tournament winner in general is more in line with your mode of thought, it being merely a momentary and fun event, but the Title of the Tournament, World Blitz Championship, removes any hesitation about wanting to find The blitz champion ... the Blitz Champion.
I think in the end that a 44 round Swiss would entail facing most of the Top 30, as would everyone else in the Top 30.
I don't know.. a championship brings together players to play a championship. Doesn't imply there must be one champion, two or more in the end.
I made the point earlier, that for reasons of modesty it would be a fair move to have chess tournaments end with two winners by default. I continued that playing it out until error and ingenuity meet and a winner emerges is a fair and modest move too: not trying to pretend we could ever or should play perfect and draw, rather highlight human error is cool and allows learning and winning.
A 4-day Swiss would be good in a computer championship. For humans, it is not easy to fight at the same level of motivation once they drop out of contention for the prizes. A short Swiss includes dice rolls, but it allows players to shine who could not prove it and prove it over and over again. That brings forth their best! And makes them test the truly best the most. And over the course of 5 or 8 years, the dice rolls do not prevent probability to show which players are the best over time. Could there be prizes all the way down to the last place, and to the last round of a, say, 3-day-Swiss, money for every half point to keep motivation aglow? Do we want that? Maybe. Or maybe a few dice rolls are cooler and sweeter
Let me think about some formula that would guarantee everybody some money while also guaranteeing greater awards to the winners.
Hi !
Jan 13, 2025
0
#558
If $40 per point were awarded in R1, we are talking about roughly $128,000 given out total ($40*~25), $60 per point awarded for R2 comes out to about $96,000 given out total for the round, $80 per point for R3 coming out to about $64,000 total for the round, $100 per point for R4 delivering about $40,000 for R4, $150 per point for R5 coming out to about $30,000, $200 per point for R6 (QFs) coming to about $20,000, $300 per point in R7 (SFs) coming to about $15,000, and $500 per point in the Final to about $12,500 for a total of about over $404,500 total. The Prize fund was $450,000.
Now, I'd expect the winner to earn in this way about $800+$1100+$1500+$1500+$2000+$3000+$4500+7500 which would entail about a $22,000 game award... not nearly enough, so perhaps another $25,000 for 1st, $15,000 for 2nd, and $5,000 each for 3rd-4th. Clearly, $450,000 is not enough Prize money for a huge 256-player tournament, and I have no real solution without greater sponsorship. With this formula, perhaps a 1st round KO would mean only about $200 for the losers, $1000 for 2nd round losers, etc...
Seriously, except for the Top 40 in the regular Prize schedule ($1600 for 31-40, $3000 for 21-30, $5000 for 16-20, $7000 for 11-15, $9000 for 10th, $11,000 for 9th, $20,000 for 5th-8th, $42,000 for 3rd-4th, $70,000 for 2nd, and $90,000 for 1st), everybody else will seem to be shortchanged.
While a pipedream, it seems that one would need at least a $2,000,000 Prize Fund to make this equitable for the majority of the field.
Marnus
Jan 13, 2025
0
#560
SymphonicKnight wrote:
If $40 per point were awarded in R1, we are talking about roughly $128,000 given out total ($40*~25).....
....While a pipedream, it seems that one would need at least a $2,000,000 Prize Fund to make this equitable for the majority of the field.
Oh, it's a great idea, but not one needed for such a large tourney. Where the idea shines is in these Super GM tourneys where often the latter games are largely meaningless. Giving $$ for people to fight for all the way through the tournament is what makes it desirable.
Also...you don't award a set $$ per each game won, you do it at the end of the tournament by taking the total prize fund and dividing the bulk of it out (say 75%) by wins. You still keep the 25% for place prizes, so no one goes home empty handed. Heck...they are often given appearance fees anyway!
In general, it would seem that being a tournament winner in general is more in line with your mode of thought, it being merely a momentary and fun event, but the Title of the Tournament, World Blitz Championship, removes any hesitation about wanting to find The blitz champion ... the Blitz Champion.
I think in the end that a 44 round Swiss would entail facing most of the Top 30, as would everyone else in the Top 30.
I don't know.. a championship brings together players to play a championship. Doesn't imply there must be one champion, two or more in the end.
I made the point earlier, that for reasons of modesty it would be a fair move to have chess tournaments end with two winners by default. I continued that playing it out until error and ingenuity meet and a winner emerges is a fair and modest move too: not trying to pretend we could ever or should play perfect and draw, rather highlight human error is cool and allows learning and winning.
A 4-day Swiss would be good in a computer championship. For humans, it is not easy to fight at the same level of motivation once they drop out of contention for the prizes. A short Swiss includes dice rolls, but it allows players to shine who could not prove it and prove it over and over again. That brings forth their best! And makes them test the truly best the most. And over the course of 5 or 8 years, the dice rolls do not prevent probability to show which players are the best over time. Could there be prizes all the way down to the last place, and to the last round of a, say, 3-day-Swiss, money for every half point to keep motivation aglow? Do we want that? Maybe. Or maybe a few dice rolls are cooler and sweeterÂ