I'm pretty sure, the 'serious' chess players will never be more than a few percent of the whole pool.
This is true of any competitive game, but chess is seeing some crazy growth in the last few months, and we will probably see a few months more. A small percentage of 80,000+ active users during peak hours on lichess is not small enough to ignore IMO. Especially for clubs who have been forced to go online, the lichess tools are certainly lacking when compared to [chess.com](www.chess.com/article/view/how-to-run-chess-events-online), but I'm sure many of us here would like to see lichess join that fight.
@sheckley666 says in comment #51: "I'm pretty sure, the 'serious' chess players will never be more than a few percent of the whole pool."
You are right. This is why I proposed in the #22 and #27 comments that Swiss tournaments and Round Robin be used exclusively for team events.
Serious players can create private teams and call exclusive tournaments for their group members.
The plebs can go on with their Arena tournaments.
lichess.org/forum/redirect/post/NJkstAOZ
lichess.org/forum/redirect/post/2C8vuUW1
You are right. This is why I proposed in the #22 and #27 comments that Swiss tournaments and Round Robin be used exclusively for team events.
Serious players can create private teams and call exclusive tournaments for their group members.
The plebs can go on with their Arena tournaments.
lichess.org/forum/redirect/post/NJkstAOZ
lichess.org/forum/redirect/post/2C8vuUW1
@TacticalBert great that you tried this as well. I ran a 6-section 4-round G/25+5s scholastic swiss tournament this Sunday with 120 participants, all with bash scripts using curl and the challenge API (lichess.org/api#operation/challengeCreate). I got the tokens ahead of time via a registration form, and wrote a simple script to test them, which precluded any game-time issues. The tournament was a success, but it was a pretty big drag on me (testing the tokens, emailing/posting the pairings, working out no-shows, etc). The total time it took was appx. 4 hours, but if the swiss system was native, it would have taken 2. But at least I know it's possible to do now!
@redbullet64 out of curiosity could you expand a bit more on this? I'm assuming you got the oath tokens from all the players then used the tokens of one player to send a challenge to the other player, which you then accepted using the other player's token? Sounds like a sweet setup
@thibault Since you are asking - there is exactly one problem with Arena tournaments from where I stand. The format is "score the most points in as many games as possible". This rewards those who play the most games, encourages several problematic behaviors in scholastic players:
a) Play 11 thoughtless moves, then pre-arrange a draw to get a point on both sides
b) Resign after losing a pawn or exchange, because the time value of the remainder of the game is less than starting a new one
c) Go for quick traps, and just abandon ship / move on to the next game if something goes wrong.
Basically, the system has an unintended effect of causing kids to learn all the wrong lessons.
An easy fix was suggested by @xK4LIBUR in reply #31 - "Ability to delay pairings until a round is completed.". If you give the organizer a button to do this, all problems go away!
a) Play 11 thoughtless moves, then pre-arrange a draw to get a point on both sides
b) Resign after losing a pawn or exchange, because the time value of the remainder of the game is less than starting a new one
c) Go for quick traps, and just abandon ship / move on to the next game if something goes wrong.
Basically, the system has an unintended effect of causing kids to learn all the wrong lessons.
An easy fix was suggested by @xK4LIBUR in reply #31 - "Ability to delay pairings until a round is completed.". If you give the organizer a button to do this, all problems go away!
a) consecutive draws no longer award any points
b and c) never seen that happen in Lichess tournaments. It breaks the win streak.
Can you show me tournaments exhibiting the behaviors described in b) and c)?
b and c) never seen that happen in Lichess tournaments. It breaks the win streak.
Can you show me tournaments exhibiting the behaviors described in b) and c)?
@TacticalBert in #48 and @redbullet64 in #56 seem like they found a solution to the problem.
I followed the link provided by redbullet64 [lichess.org/api#operation/challengeCreate] but I lack the technical and linguistic knowledge (I don't speak English) to apply this solution.
Please, Lichess developers, do something about it!
I followed the link provided by redbullet64 [lichess.org/api#operation/challengeCreate] but I lack the technical and linguistic knowledge (I don't speak English) to apply this solution.
Please, Lichess developers, do something about it!
Si alguien puede dejar las indicaciones de como programarlo (en ingles o español) me gustaria ver si es posible programar algo por fuera de Lichess usando la API.
@thibault
Extreme examples of (b) - lichess.org/XaTydLjP/black#1, lichess.org/swwZfdm1/black. Resigning vs. a stronger player, to get an easier pairing and score points faster.
(b) Dropping a pawn and resigning - lichess.org/SbbMjOgt/black#36
(b) Resigning quickly just so they can get another game in before tournament end - lichess.org/d0wMS3vo/white#5
(b) Resigning quickly down just an exchange - lichess.org/e91xqs0w/white#30
There is also the matter of the quality of decisions - everything they do in these tournaments is based on getting to a quick outcome, rather than playing to a strategic advantage.
I will poke around to find examples of (c).
I just realized I didn't even mention the #1 problematic behavior. Because some kids play so much faster, others refuse to even play in the tournament at all, since they know they have no chance to win. This is exactly the opposite of what chess should be - it should reward thoughtful players.
To clarify my thought - Arena format really does have a lot of advantages in terms of efficiency. In fact, it makes a lot of sense for kids to play practice tournaments in Arena, to get many games in and gain experience. However, in a COVID world where real tournaments aren't possible, emulating real tournaments with Arena simply doesn't work.
My 5c.
Extreme examples of (b) - lichess.org/XaTydLjP/black#1, lichess.org/swwZfdm1/black. Resigning vs. a stronger player, to get an easier pairing and score points faster.
(b) Dropping a pawn and resigning - lichess.org/SbbMjOgt/black#36
(b) Resigning quickly just so they can get another game in before tournament end - lichess.org/d0wMS3vo/white#5
(b) Resigning quickly down just an exchange - lichess.org/e91xqs0w/white#30
There is also the matter of the quality of decisions - everything they do in these tournaments is based on getting to a quick outcome, rather than playing to a strategic advantage.
I will poke around to find examples of (c).
I just realized I didn't even mention the #1 problematic behavior. Because some kids play so much faster, others refuse to even play in the tournament at all, since they know they have no chance to win. This is exactly the opposite of what chess should be - it should reward thoughtful players.
To clarify my thought - Arena format really does have a lot of advantages in terms of efficiency. In fact, it makes a lot of sense for kids to play practice tournaments in Arena, to get many games in and gain experience. However, in a COVID world where real tournaments aren't possible, emulating real tournaments with Arena simply doesn't work.
My 5c.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.