2013 CYCC Champions

[Felix Dumont]

Re : Re: Re : Re: Posting of Rd. 6 Standings?

This is the problem. Some people told me that David Itkin won because of the number of wins. However, all the players had the same number of wins (!), so which tie-break was used? We all thought it was the progressive score, as in the handbook, which would give Nikita as the winner.
The tournament website clearly says that Nikita has the third place after tie-breaks. So, can the organizers confirm who finished third?

[John Upper]

Re: Re : Re: Posting of Rd. 6 Standings?

Now, if we look at the handbook :
a) Swiss Sections

Direct encounter
Sum of progressive score
Buchholz
Playoff
Sonneborn-Berger
Won games
Games played with Black

According to this, Nikita should have the third place.

When I read Felix's post I was worried that the 2013 CYCC organizers had just misapplied the rules.

That's serious. Nikita and/or Team Quebec should certainly file an appeal if he or they think Nikita has been unfairly stripped of third place.


In order to save embarrassment for the organizers and more quickly resolve this for Nikita, I decided to spend a few minutes looking into it.



First, I looked up the CFC rules for the CYCC. (they're here)


The part Felix quotes above is correct. But it is also incomplete. Here is what the CFC Handbook says about CYCC tie-breaks:

710. Tie Break:

Should two or more players finish the tournament with the same number of points the following tie-break systems are recommended.

a) Swiss Sections

Direct encounter
Sum of progressive score
Buchholz
Playoff
Sonneborn-Berger
Won games
Games played with Black

b) Round Robin Sections

Direct encounter
Playoff
Games played with Black
Koya
Sonneborn-Berger
Won games

It is recommended that playoffs only be arranged to determine the official Canadian representative to the WYCC. If playoffs are planned adequate time must be set aside for a conclusion to be reached.

As some eagle-eyed readers might have noticed, the sentences immediately before and after the list of tie-breaks which Felix quotes, add context which undermines Felix's conclusion that Nikita should have 3rd place.

The Handbook says the tie-breaks it lists are "recommended", not required. (Felix left that part out.)
As I interpret it, that means the CFC leaves it up to the organizers which tie-breaks will be used.
When we were typing up the results on July 13, I was told by event organizer Les Bunning that the tie-break used was most wins. (I hope I'm remembering that right, I am very tired.)

Obviously, all of this could have been avoided with 7 rounds and proper playoffs...

could have.

The more rounds there are, the more "spread out" the bell curve of results would (probably) be; and fewer players would end up in ties.

A 7th round would have increased the probability of a unique 1st place finisher, and (probably) reduced the number of players tied for 2nd and 3rd; but apart from small sections with few competitors, it is unlikely it would eliminate ties for 2nd, and very unlikely it would eliminate ties for 3rd.


I agree with Felix that it is obvious that playoffs would resolve ties for third place.

As the Handbook says --- in a another part not quoted in Felix's excerpt --- "It is recommended that playoffs only be arranged to determine the official Canadian representative to the WYCC".
The Canadian rep at the WYCC is the first-place finisher at the CYCC. So, if I understand this part of the CFC Handbook correctly, playoffs for second place and third place are not only not required, the Handbook actually recommends they are not held.
[or is there some ambiguity caused by the location of the word "only" in that sentence? maybe there is, and that ought to be fixed.]

The 2013 CYCC organizers chose to hold playoffs for 1st place ties, and for 2nd place ties, but not for 3rd place ties. As I read it, the Handbook leaves this choice up to the Organizers by recommending tie-break methods but not mandating any particular one.

Felix is a CFC Governor, so he can propose that the Handbook be changed; for example, to mandate playoffs for the top three positions at the CYCC.


Alternatively, if the bid to host the 2014 CYCC in Montreal is approved (a bid I think Felix is part of), the Montreal organizers could extend the playoffs to cover the top three finishing positions. This would certainly be more work for the organizers, but I would applaud their efforts, since I think playoffs are a much better way to break ties in Swiss events than statistics like Buchholz or Sonneborn-Berger. They're also, IMHO, a more fair way to identify the better player than the tie-break we used at the 2013 CYCC, since (as was pointed out by several people during the London Candidates round-robin) "most wins" identifies the same player in any score group as "most losses".

It remains to be seen whether organizers of future CYCC events are able and prepared to do the extra work to break third-place ties through playoffs, rather than take the easy way out -- like we did -- by using one of the CFC's recommended formulae.

[Hugh Brodie]

Re: Re : Re: 2013 CYCC Champions

No IA was necessary for the CYCC if it's not FIDE rated; I think Danny Goldenberg is the IA for the Canadian Open.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Posting of Rd. 6 Standings?

Did they have an International Arbiter for the CYCC? Do they have one for the Canadian Open?

[Andrei Botez]

Attn Felix

Stop spending your time on chesstalk today, go out and celebrate!

Happy birthday!:)

[Felix Dumont]

Re : Re: Posting of Rd. 6 Standings?

There still is an issue for the U18. There was tie-breaks for the third spot. Nikita Kraiouchkine was announced as the winner on tie-breaks and the organizers decided not to do playoffs. So, everyone thought he had the third spot. But, apparently it was announced during the closing ceremony that it was a mistake and that David Itkin finished third after tie-breaks.

Now, if we look at the handbook :
a) Swiss Sections

Direct encounter
Sum of progressive score
Buchholz
Playoff
Sonneborn-Berger
Won games
Games played with Black

According to this, Nikita should have the third place. Obviously, all of this could have been avoided with 7 rounds and proper playoffs...

# Name ID Rtng Rd 1 Rd 2 Rd 3 Rd 4 Rd 5 Rd 6 Tot Prize
1 David Zhang 145883 2280 W11 W2 W5 D3 D6 W4 5.0
2 Aquino Inigo 136995 2211 W14 L1 W10 W8 W3 D7 4.5
3 Nikita Kraiouchkine 3rd on TB 135223 2334 D4 W10 W9 D1 L2 D6 3.5

[Tom O'Donnell]

Re: Posting of Rd. 6 Standings?

Do we have results from the tiebreaks yet?

I know Adam Dorrance and Kevin Wan won their respective sections.

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Posting of Rd. 6 Standings?

Do we have results from the tiebreaks yet?

[Michael Lo]

Re: Posting of Rd. 6 Standings?

Seems that it is true. On Facebook someone (Mike Lo @ Chess in BC) gave some insight. I will not repeat as it sounded like a incompetence of players & a TD.

Yes, we followed the event very close. Feeding realtime news from players & parents on-site. We have the BC players final result out right after the playoffs. Check it out if your are interested - https://www.facebook.com/groups/2842...5213846167920/. Yes, you need to join fb.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: Posting of Rd. 6 Standings?

I'm not on Facebook.

not too late to join LOL

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Posting of Rd. 6 Standings?

Seems that it is true. On Facebook someone (Mike Lo @ Chess in BC) gave some insight. I will not repeat as it sounded like a incompetence of players & a TD.

I'm not on Facebook.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: Posting of Rd. 6 Standings?

Three hours for an appeal and still no decision? Sounds like arguing over what constitutes repetition of position.

Seems that it is true. On Facebook someone (Mike Lo @ Chess in BC) gave some insight. I will not repeat as it sounded like a incompetence of players & a TD.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Posting of Rd. 6 Standings?

Thanks Bob,

the standings would have been posted hours earlier, but I got sucked into a 3 hour-long appeal process.

Three hours for an appeal and still no decision? Sounds like arguing over what constitutes repetition of position.

[John Upper]

Re: Posting of Rd. 6 Standings?

Thanks Bob,

the standings would have been posted hours earlier, but I got sucked into a 3 hour-long appeal process. (no fun for anyone there, but the two girls involved could NOT have been nicer under such stressful circumstances: clear, direct and helpful answers from both, and I had no sense that either of the two were twisting the facts to her own advantage. A real model of rational and civilized conflict resolution, and one that (I'm afraid I have to say it) puts many parents to shame.

Although I gritted my teeth at how painfully slow the process was (when I believed it could have been done much faster, and I knew dozens of players and parents desperately wanted to know about the play-off/tie break rules, but I was too occupied to post them) I have to say that now that it's behind me, I'm glad I got to see it.

TD Frank Dixon, and players Sobiga Vyravanathan and Alexandra Botez deserve recognition and credit for how they handled this. And while one of the players will inevitably be disappointed by the Appeals Committee's decision, both of them should (and I hope will) feel proud about how they handled themselves.


(I'll write about it in the August CCN).

The standings are here.

The play-off info is here.

[Bindi Cheng]

Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: 2013 CYCC Champions

Unfortunately no. Nikita Kraiouchkine was the favourite of his section (U18), but he nearly stopped playing now that he is in college, so it's not surprising that he under-performed. There should be lots of players from Quebec in the top 3 though (although at it was pointed out in another thread, it would be pretty expensive for these players to play in the WYCC).

The U14 section could have been incredibly interesting with the three highest rated players, Razvan Preotu, Michael Song and Olivier-Kenta Chiku-Ratté. It's very unfortunate that none of them could be there (leaving not many opponents to Jason Cao).

Part of the reason for them not being there is probably that even if they win the section, they still don't get fully reimbursed for their costs at the WYCC and at their level, it's way cheaper just to go to a norm tournament in the states than travel all across the world for a more expensive tournament with other hungry kids anyhow. The worlds is only fun for those going for the experience as it's not a practical tournament to go norm-hunting in