A player should get a point for participation for making a difference from players that have not participated in previous or future rounds. A player showing up and resigning after 1 move is awkward but how often does it happen, it does not seem very rational to me.
I'm inclined to believe that white's initial advantage is smaller that in classic chess as there are more pieces and more time for black to equalize.
In my system one win and one loss worth more than one advantage and one disadvantage and that more than two draws as I want to encourage the more decisive results. This has been done before with the 3-1-0 system used sometimes in the Bilbao tournament. But I too think that 150% for 1W+1L vs 2D ((3+0)/(1+1)) is too much so I reduced it to 125% ((9+1)/(4+4)). Anyway here tournament organizers (like the Bilbao ones :)) just joking they'll never play those games) are free to use any points system they deem fair.
The matter of the threefold repetitions is very complex I think. But there are cases where you may enforce a threefold repetition with inferior material and I don't think that's very fair. I mean the superior side has worked a whole game to become superior and missed something. The inferior side still gets something from it (3>1) but does not deserve to draw in my opinion. This rule I don't think should be up by tournament organizers.
George Duke's comment if to that you are referring vickalan was not about our quantity of comments but about the fact that our many messages got out of context, or at least that's what I think. George Duke if you see this comment please clarify if I am doing something wrong I'll abstain for the future.
Vickalan I'm glad for your interest and collaboration!
@Vickalan
A player should get a point for participation for making a difference from players that have not participated in previous or future rounds. A player showing up and resigning after 1 move is awkward but how often does it happen, it does not seem very rational to me.
I'm inclined to believe that white's initial advantage is smaller that in classic chess as there are more pieces and more time for black to equalize.
In my system one win and one loss worth more than one advantage and one disadvantage and that more than two draws as I want to encourage the more decisive results. This has been done before with the 3-1-0 system used sometimes in the Bilbao tournament. But I too think that 150% for 1W+1L vs 2D ((3+0)/(1+1)) is too much so I reduced it to 125% ((9+1)/(4+4)). Anyway here tournament organizers (like the Bilbao ones :)) just joking they'll never play those games) are free to use any points system they deem fair.
The matter of the threefold repetitions is very complex I think. But there are cases where you may enforce a threefold repetition with inferior material and I don't think that's very fair. I mean the superior side has worked a whole game to become superior and missed something. The inferior side still gets something from it (3>1) but does not deserve to draw in my opinion. This rule I don't think should be up by tournament organizers.
George Duke's comment if to that you are referring vickalan was not about our quantity of comments but about the fact that our many messages got out of context, or at least that's what I think. George Duke if you see this comment please clarify if I am doing something wrong I'll abstain for the future.
Vickalan I'm glad for your interest and collaboration!