pairings question for TDs

[Aris Marghetis]

Hi there, when I read rule 623 (Rules on Odd Men), it specifically states that the lowest ranked player in an odd-numbered score group becomes the odd man, and is paired down.

The only explicit exceptions that I can find, are regarding whether the remaining players in that score group can be paired at all, which means they haven't played each other before.

However, please consider this simplified scenario. After 3 rounds, I have 3 players with 2 points. Let's call these players A/B/C. Now, C would normally be the odd man. If A and B have already played each other, then A would play C, and B would become the odd man, etc. In the worst possible case, I could have 3 odd men to pair down, but I digress! ;)

This is the way that I have always done it. Now, let me expand the above example to include previous colours. Assuming that A/B/C have not played each other yet, and their previous colours were BWB/BWB/WBW, if I make C the odd man, then B would end up with colours of BWBB after 4 rounds, and initiating pressure to have WW in his last 2 rounds.

Wouldn't it make more sense to, in effect, interchange the score group before the odd man is removed, in order to have as much colour equalization as feasible? In other words, A would play C, and their colours would end up BWBW/WBWB. I would not do this for colour alternation, and note that this consideration is a separate adjustment from the seemingly widely applied VARIATION 624.1: The odd man may be paired with the next highest-ranked player whom he has not met in the next-lower group and who is due the opposite colour. Again, I read this variation only for colour equalization, not colour alternation, agreed?!

Thanks in advance for anyone who can help out my curiosity. If you do agree with my proposal, please also indicate any official reference, in case I get challenged onsite! :)

[Hugh Brodie]

Re: pairings question for TDs

Have you taken into account the ratings of the players? Let's say - the ratings of A, B, and C are 2000, 1725, and 1700. In this case, it shouldn't make much difference if you swap B and C if there are any pairing or colour conflicts.

[Aris Marghetis]

Re: pairings question for TDs

Have you taken into account the ratings of the players? Let's say - the ratings of A, B, and C are 2000, 1725, and 1700. In this case, it shouldn't make much difference if you swap B and C if there are any pairing or colour conflicts.

Hi Hugh, thanks, and I agree with the intent of what you are saying. I lean towards more sections with smaller rating ranges within each section, so that should rarely be an issue (in your example, what would be worse would be ratings of 2000/1900/1600, etc.)

However, have you ever seen something more specific than what you wrote above? I guess my concern is that such an approach would be too fluid under angered scrutiny! ;)

[Frank Dixon]

Re: pairings question for TDs

Hugh's point is vital and central for Aris' question. In small events, with only a few rounds (weekend EOCA tournaments for example), this sort of question comes up all the time, especially if a few upsets have occurred, which themselves tend to skew the balance of colours. My own preference as a TD is to balance colours wherever possible, among contenders, after even-numbered rounds, since that is the thing players (many of whom don't understand the pairing rules, but believe that they do, and many think they know more than the TD!) complain about the most. Late in the event, with a small field, trade-offs almost always have to be made when it comes to pairing across scoregroups, to achieve maximum fairness.

For class prize determination in the last round, I try to pair the contenders, if that is possible without skewing the other pairings. This is from Jonathan Berry's published excellent example in running EOCA events in the 1970s, when he was living in Ottawa and serving as CFC ED, while editing the magazine.

As far as criticism from players about pairings, as an experienced TD I can attest that it goes with the territory!! I have always made myself available to players who want to question their pairings, for friendly but firm interaction, and have so far come out on top of at least 90 per cent of all resulting discussions, some of which have been quite heated. Every so often I will find that the player may have a legitimate complaint and a better way to do things, even though that might not necessarily favour him. The biggest friction comes when a player suggests an alternative arrangement, which favours him, with an error I may have made being involved, and I see the error, then change my pairings to something that is worse for him than the original pairing!!

The Swiss pairing rules do allow for some room to maneuver. Aris, as an engineer yourself, think of it as "degrees of freedom" from the science of thermodynamics!! The other approach is to do everything by computer program, and then the TD can say that the program gave this set of pairings, and offer to let the:) player argue with the program!! I've seen it done!!