Heh. I felt the same way =D. However, because we're unused to applying our fundamentals to 9x9, doing the review itself seems more helpful to us.

_________________
Someday I want to be strong enough to earn KGS[-].

It's not irrelevant if it is the tie-breaker

I would definitely be up for a 19x19 or 13x13 tournament as well. I've found the 9x9 games really valuable so far though. It allows me to think about shape without getting caught up in the larger board situation.

keithlard: If you are interested in 19x19 tournament type games, have you looked into the Advanced Study Room league? There's another forum post about it here: http://www.lifein19x19.com/forum/viewto ... 36&start=0 . Based on the few games I've played so far, I would recommend it.

A fair point. However, if I were well behind with no realistic chance of catching up, in a real game I would start making crazy invasions and overplays, hoping to force my opponent into thinking himself out of time, or making a mistake under pressure. Most times you still lose anyway, but by a huge margin instead of a slim one. That tactic doesn't make sense here as it would in real Go.

Regarding the board size, I agree that 13x13 would be better than 9x9, but I don't really see the objection to the full-size board. One important advantage is that it would allow the games on KGS to be ranked, and thus help improve (or at least inform) your server rank.

However, I'm in it for the social and fun aspect of the tourney, so I'm happy to play whatever the group prefers. A game is a game!

No reason for us not to have a 19x19 tourney in parallel, I guess, if enough people are interested

I'm not strong enough for the ASR league yet, though I hope to join it soon. On the other hand, if lots of other weak players join as well, I might get an even game

It is irrelevant for the game of Go. If it is used as a tiebreaker, the type of game played in that tournament is not Go.

_________________
A good system naturally covers all corner cases without further effort.

This is your opinion only. It's a fine opinion, and logical, but it is not fact, it is just how you feel, and why the idea irritates you. Tiebreakers themselves are not a part of Go (hence Robert's idea of lightning tiebreaker games, which actually makes the tiebreaker on a Go bard).

Bang Neki is definitely Go. The rules are the same, the scoring is the same, the only thing that is different is what you choose to do the score. When in Rome ...

I hate this attitude to discussion. It is my opinion, yes, but I am not the only one, it is a well founded opinion, and other opinions do not have better arguments. So, it is not my opinion "only" any more than your opinion that it were my opinion only that it were your opinion only that it were my opinion only. What was your argument again?



Yes, exactly. Then why is the tiebreaker injected into the game?

With such a tiebreaker in place, a player might decide that 100% losing by 1 point is better than taking a 50/50 risk of winning by one or losing by 40 points. That is absurd.



The scoring is not the same, because there are other results than win, tie, or lose. Bang Neki is not Go, just a close relative.



Well, who are the Romans here? The problem is that many beginners have this misconception about scoring that maximizing the score were some kind of secondary goal. It is not. You either win, tie, or lose.

One needs to understand that the score tells nothing about how close a game was. Some close games are won by one point, but others by one liberty, and still others by one ko threat.

_________________
A good system naturally covers all corner cases without further effort.

In response to the discussion and an attempt to prevent it from turning into a derailment. Here are the why's, whether or not the logic was sound is moot this was what I was thinking.

Re: Board size

9x9 was chosen because a) this was originally a beginners tourney and I was expecting it to be mostly sub 20 kyu players b) somewhere around this tourney it was recommended that you play at least a few games of 9x9 and they are hard to get on KGS c) and most importantly it is quick and two games can be played easily in under an hour without either player feeling rushed at any point.

I would be perfectly happy to run a 19x19 or 13x13 tourney if there were interested parties but I thought I saw a thread somewhere that looked like such a tourney was already running.

Re: Tie-breaker

This is mostly down to my newbie status. I've never played in a Go tourney and didn't really know how to deal with tie breaking. I went with the score ratio mostly because it was the first idea that came to mind. If all the participants are okay with it we can easily change it to a play off.

_________________
=.=.=.=.=.=.=.
Teamovich 2
viewtopic.php?f=38&t=3062

My (Dead) Study Journal
viewtopic.php?f=48&t=2058

My argument was: You are not the tournament director, so your opinion has little weight, as does mine. If the organisers wish for this as a tiebreaker, and the participants are happy, then it is a perfectly acceptable tiebreaker. Other opinions than yours obviously do have better arguments than you accept to their minds, else their opinion would change to yours. People have different priority values. This as a tiebreaker also encourages a lot of good habits, such as trying to count accurately and play the most precise moves possible regardless of whether they are winning or not. I'm not advocating it as better, I would prefer not to have it as a tiebreaker, but if other people prefer its pros to its cons, it is at least a valid tiebreaker.

This is not a discussing designed to reach a "right" answer, as there isn't one. If you don't like the fact that all aspects of this discussion are, in effect, a subjective outlook on competitive priorities, then sure, be annoyed by it, but that doesn't change the fact that this argument is not something that can be objectively won.



He might, but the value of the win is more than 1000 tiebreaker points differences, so I suspect in reality this doesn't happen.



The Romans in this case are the tournament participants. If they like the idea, and tracking score / maximising wins / minimising losses appeals to them as part of the attraction of a first Go tournament, then it's their right to do so. A more traditional tiebreaker may not be as exciting for them. There is no right or wrong here, just different depending on what priorities are being sought.

@Sink:

Likewise, if you'd rather tiebreak on blitz games, that's fine too - actually, tiebreak matches I think are the ideal tiebreak system if time constraints don't prevent them from being played

That's just your opinion.

_________________
A good system naturally covers all corner cases without further effort.

noodley 2-0 TominNJ
Game 1: noodley(w) 37.5-3 TominNJ
Game 2: TominNJ 7.5-82 noodley

Please let me know if I scored this right, it's the first time I've had to count the individual scores. My scoring method was:

Game 1:
Noodley White 5.5 komi + 15 captured + 17 = 37.5
TominNJ Black 1 captured + 2 = 3

Game 2:
Noodley Black - 26 captured + 56 = 82
TominNJ White - 5.5 komi + 2 captured = 7.5

This looks about right except the loser should get credit for the area he owns unless you wiped him out completely on the second game. Though if you look under the names on the right hand side of the screen the score should appear in red. Read that off after you've removed all the dead stones and both clicked "Done" and that should be the correct score.

_________________
=.=.=.=.=.=.=.
Teamovich 2
viewtopic.php?f=38&t=3062

My (Dead) Study Journal
viewtopic.php?f=48&t=2058

keithlard 2-0 kukula
Game 1: keithlard (W) 37.5 - 21.0 kukula (B)
Game 2: keithlard (B) 41.0 - 16.5 kukula (W)

Results

kukula 2-0 TominNJ - Scores: 69.5 - 36.5
noodley 2-0 Sink - Scores: 42.5 - 29.5
SinK 2-0 kukula - Scores: 77.5 - 41.5
kukula 2-0 noodley - Scores: 66.5 - 40.5
noodley 2-0 keithlard - Scores: 52.5 - 27.5
noodley 2-0 TominNJ - Scores: 119.5 - 10.5
keithlard 2-0 kukula - Scores: 78.5 - 37.5

Standings

Player - WDL - Points - Points For - Points Against - Tiebreak Ratio

noodley - 3-0-1 - 3 - 255 - 134 - 1.90
kukula - 2-0-2 - 2 - 215 - 233 - 0.92
SinK - 1-0-1 - 1 - 107 - 84 - 1.27
keithlard - 1-0-1 - 1 - 106 - 90 - 1.18
TominNJ - 0-0-2 - 0 - 47 - 189 - 0.25

Remaining matches

TominNJ vs. Sink
TominNJ vs. kiethlard
kiethlard vs. Sink

Reviews of the last 4 to follow

SinK 2-0 TominNJ

Game 1: S1NK(w) 39.5-20 TominNJ
Game 2: TominNJ(w) 22.5-38 S1NK

_________________
=.=.=.=.=.=.=.
Teamovich 2
viewtopic.php?f=38&t=3062

My (Dead) Study Journal
viewtopic.php?f=48&t=2058

Results

kukula 2-0 TominNJ - Scores: 69.5 - 36.5
noodley 2-0 Sink - Scores: 42.5 - 29.5
SinK 2-0 kukula - Scores: 77.5 - 41.5
kukula 2-0 noodley - Scores: 66.5 - 40.5
noodley 2-0 keithlard - Scores: 52.5 - 27.5
noodley 2-0 TominNJ - Scores: 119.5 - 10.5
keithlard 2-0 kukula - Scores: 78.5 - 37.5
SinK 2-0 TominNJ - Scores: 77.5 - 42.5

Standings

Player - WDL - Points - Points For - Points Against - Tiebreak Ratio

noodley - 3-0-1 - 3 - 255 - 134 - 1.90
SinK - 2-0-1 - 2 - 184.5 - 126.5 - 1.46
kukula - 2-0-2 - 2 - 215 - 233 - 0.92
keithlard - 1-0-1 - 1 - 106 - 90 - 1.18
TominNJ - 0-0-3 - 0 - 89.5 - 166.5 - 0.54

Remaining matches

TominNJ vs. kiethlard
kiethlard vs. Sink

Reviews of the last 6 games to follow this evening hopefully!

keithlard 2-0 TominNJ
Game 1: keithlard (W) 34.5 - 23.0 TominNJ
Game 2: keithlard (B) 34.0 - 23.5 TominNJ

S1NK 2-0 keithlard
Game 1: S1NK (B) 32.0 - 30.5 keithlard
Game 2: S1NK (W) 21.5 - 18.0 keithlard

Thoughts about the tournament:

I've really enjoyed playing in it as it makes the games more exciting knowing that they will count for something (and that people will be scrutinising them!). I've even had a few dan players pop in to watch some of my games, which I can't say has happened before

I find 9x9 a hard game: I would say I'm a fair bit weaker on the small board than on 19x19. I suspect this means I need to work on my basic tactics and shape knowledge. I make mistakes, especially when short of time, and 9x9 is a very unforgiving format - one slip can be the end of the game.

Because of that, I think the difference in ranks is compressed a lot: a beginner has more chance of beating an experienced player on 9x9. That makes it a better board for a tourney like this encompassing a wide range of skill levels. Also, it helps improve your counting, as the scores tend to be close, and you have to count and recount all the time.

I think it would be better if there were a few more people in the league, maybe enough to split it into a high and low division with 4 or 5 people in each. I would also vote for dropping the score ratio and using a tiebreaker match or sum of opponents' scores.

When's the next one start?