The last received vote wins in case of a tie.
When votes are equal in vote chess
Sort:
Mar 17, 2024
0
#5
Optimissed wrote:
manekapa wrote:
The last received vote wins in case of a tie.
That's obviously a bad way because the result can be fixed. It's really up to each group to decide how it's resolved. There are no rules that should govern how they prefer to do it.
Actually a good way to do it.
Sometimes a line looks good, then you find one move makes it all bad, and you have to rally the votes to change your decision at the last moment.
Hi
Mar 26, 2024
0
#7
Optimissed wrote:
There's no need to have a fixed way to do it. That problem can be got round if the captain is normally non-voting or has the casting vote and can change it.
But then someone would have to be responsible for making a decision by such-and-such deadline. What if they don't? Or what if the vote that creates a tie is cast ten minutes before the team's deadline? Does the vote captain have to be on call to immediately break the tie so that the next move can commence on time? What if it's the middle of the night for them, or they're in a work meeting? And what happens if they just don't answer? Is the game delayed until they do? (That would be a nice way to get extra time for analysis in critical positions...) Or does the team lose simply because there was a tie vote and the captain wasn't there to adjudicate it?
Plus who decides who the designated person is? Sure, most groups could reach a consensus, but how is that authority formally registered with chess.com so one and only one person can do it? Do we have to have elections? Ugh...
It sounds like a good idea, but it entails a lot of logistical problems. Having it be automatic is the easiest, smoothest way.
It's also only very rarely an actual issue. Good teams typically reach a consensus before a vote is called and tend to all vote for the consensus move.
May 10, 2024
0
#8
tlay80 wrote:
Optimissed wrote:
There's no need to have a fixed way to do it. That problem can be got round if the captain is normally non-voting or has the casting vote and can change it.
But then someone would have to be responsible for making a decision by such-and-such deadline. What if they don't? Or what if the vote that creates a tie is cast ten minutes before the team's deadline? Does the vote captain have to be on call to immediately break the tie so that the next move can commence on time? What if it's the middle of the night for them, or they're in a work meeting? And what happens if they just don't answer? Is the game delayed until they do? (That would be a nice way to get extra time for analysis in critical positions...) Or does the team lose simply because there was a tie vote and the captain wasn't there to adjudicate it?
Plus who decides who the designated person is? Sure, most groups could reach a consensus, but how is that authority formally registered with chess.com so one and only one person can do it? Do we have to have elections? Ugh...
It sounds like a good idea, but it entails a lot of logistical problems. Having it be automatic is the easiest, smoothest way.
It's also only very rarely an actual issue. Good teams typically reach a consensus before a vote is called and tend to all vote for the consensus move.
Exactly.
Best way is to have the last vote cast be the tie breaker. (Even if its the tie maker.)
May 10, 2024
0
#9
Optimissed wrote:
I think vote chess is daft anyway. I only tried to play it once and the captain of the team I was on seemed to be behaving very strangely. It was a club so I left the club. I've come to the conclusion that most clubs are not much fun. It's where inadequate people hang out. Except the Oracles.
May 10, 2024
0
#10
Vote Chess can be a lot of fun if you are in a good group, though.
This was a Vote Chess game:
Murder on the h-file - Chess Forums - Chess.com
May 10, 2024
0
#11
You make it sound like it's all an intra-team war, full of competition over what to vote for. In the dozens of vote games I've played, that's not my experience at all. People aren't fighting to get their pet idea to win -- they're trying to test ideas to get to arrive at a consensus for the best one. Split votes do happen occasionally, but they're quite rare, and if two ideas really are getting roughly equal support, then one can't really say the one that won gamed the system.
Far more often, the tiebreaking criterion comes in when a problem with a move is noticed at the last minute and people have to scramble to get enough votes to have the newly preferred move win. That alone is justification enough for having the latest vote break any tie.
How is the next move decided when two, or more, moves receive the same number of votes in vote chess?