https://sites.google.com/site/cowleychessclub/club-handicap-tournament-2
These results are summarised in the three tables below:
Grade Ray Geoff Dave Bill Jothn Score
Ray 184 X 1 0 1 1 0.75
Geoff 158 0 X 1 1 1 0.75
Dave 148 1 0 X 1 1 0.75
Bill 138 0 0 0 X 0 0
Jothn 100 0 0 0 1 X 0.25
Grade MariaW Anna MariaM Dave Score
MariaW 175 X 0 0.5 1 0.5
Anna 166 1 X 0.5 1 0.833
MariaM 143 0.5 0.5 X 0.5 0.5
Dave 143 0 0 0.5 X 0.167
Grade Gerard Heather Paul John Jenny Score
Gerard 213 X 0.5 1 1 0 0.625
Heather 161 0.5 X 1 0 1 0.625
Paul 157 0 0 X 0 1 0.25
John 136 0 1 1 X 0.5 0.625
Jenny 115 1 0 0 0.5 X 0.375
For each player, I worked out the average grade of his opponents, and subtracted this value from their own grade to give their grade advantage over the opposition that they faced. I also estimated how many points stronger than the opposition each player would have had to be in order to achieve the same score in a very long match without a time handicap, using the formula:
d = 100*s-50
In this formula, s is the score (as a fraction between 0 and 1) and d is the corresponding grade difference. This formula uses a simplified version of the ECF grading calculation, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECF_grading_system
(Bill’s zero score would have caused a problem for the Elo formula.) The results of my calculations are summarised in the table below:
Grade Oppon Advant Score Grade+-
Ray 184 136 48 0.75 24
Geoff 158 143 16 0.75 24
Dave 148 145 3 0.75 24
Bill 138 148 -10 0.00 -50
Jothn 100 157 -57 0.25 -24
MariaW 175 151 24 0.50 0
Anna 166 189 -23 0.83 35
MariaM 143 161 -18 0.50 0
Dave 143 126 17 0.17 -35
Gerard 213 142 71 0.63 11
Heather 161 155 6 0.63 11
Paul 157 156 1 0.25 -24
John 136 162 -26 0.63 11
Jenny 115 167 -52 0.38 -11
If the time handicap had been perfect, and enough rounds were been played, the players scores would all be close to 0.5. In reality, of course, they are not. The scatter graph below plots each players’ grade advantage over their opposition (horizontal axis) against the grade advantage they would need to achieve their actual score in a long match without a time handicap (vertical axis):
This graph suggests that the weakest players were at a disadvantage of about 20 ECF points, despite the time handicap. It also suggests that the strongest players had a corresponding advantage. This result concurs with the organiser’s statement that the tournament has invariably been won by a highly graded player over the seven years that it had been running prior to this year (see the comments to the previous article). The handicap system used in this tournament is described in the link:
https://sites.google.com/site/cowleychessclub/club-handicap-tournament-2/handicap-rules-2011-12
In this tournament, the lower graded player always had White. The advantage of having the White pieces corresponds to about 35 Elo points, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-move_advantage_in_chess
35 Elo points corresponds to 35 * 25 / 200 = 4.375 ECF points. This tournament therefore had an additional handicap of about 2 ECF points, resulting from the weaker player having White 100% of the time rather than the usual 50% of the time. This advantage is negligible compared with the scatter on the graph above, so I have ignored it in my calculations. I suggest a slightly more aggressive time handicap:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
0 30:00 29:29 28:58 28:27 27:55 27:24 26:54 26:23 25:52 25:22
10 24:51 24:21 23:51 23:21 22:52 22:22 21:53 21:25 20:56 20:28
20 20:00 19:32 19:05 18:38 18:12 17:46 17:20 16:54 16:29 16:05
30 15:40 15:16 14:53 14:30 14:07 13:45 13:23 13:02 12:41 12:20
40 12:00 11:40 11:21 11:02 10:43 10:25 10:08 09:50 09:33 09:17
50 09:01 08:45 08:30 08:15 08:00 07:46 07:32 07:18 07:05 06:52
60 06:40 06:28 06:16 06:04 05:53 05:42 05:32 05:22 05:12 05:02
70 04:52 04:43 04:34 04:26 04:17 04:09 04:01 03:53 03:46 03:39
80 03:32 03:25 03:18 03:12 03:06 03:00 02:54 02:48 02:43 02:38
90 02:32 02:27 02:23 02:18 02:13 02:09 02:05 02:01 01:57 01:53
100 01:49 01:45 01:42 01:39 01:35 01:32 01:29 01:26 01:23 01:21
110 01:18 01:15 01:13 01:10 01:08 01:06 01:03 01:01 00:59 00:57
This table gives the time on the clock for the higher graded player, for grade differences from 0 to 119. The corresponding time for the lower rated player is the balance of 60 minutes. I constructed this table using the formula:
t = 60/(2^(g/20)+1)
In this formula, g is the ECF grade difference, and t is the time allocated to the higher graded player. With this formula, the time allocated to the higher graded player, relative to that allocated to the lower graded player, halves for every 20 point difference in their grade. The time allocated to the stronger player drops below one minute at a grade difference of 118. Nonetheless, Crowthorne Chess Club successfully uses even shorter time limits, see:
http://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=3127
The stronger player’s analysis will be 1 ply less deep if he does his thinking on his opponent’s clock time rather than his own, which is not an enormous handicap. One minute should be enough for him to physically make all his moves, provided that he wins quickly enough! Nonetheless, even with my proposed time limits, I expect that the stronger players will still have an advantage, but the handicaps should be fairer overall.
A bit imcomplete,send me a email to Andadores26@yahoo.com
ReplyDeleteThe ukrainians are using a software very cool,its based on Davidov books about pedagogical science ,i can not comment here because its to liittle space,just 4006 simbols allowed
Is good to find people expert in computers dedicated to chess
Best regard
Chess trainning science is already done,the riussians and the ukrainians are using a app built by Grabinski,a GUI is in rus,,if ure ainteresting in builiding something similar to them but with more features,let me know,by mail,this space is very reduced to comments
ReplyDeleteAndadores26@yahoo.com
Regards