Series : Armageddon – Table of Contents
Had this idea about maybe early 2023, probably around the same time as 2023 classical WCC. It’s unlikely someone hasn’t thought of it, but I’m not sure what terms to look up to find out if someone bothered to write up this folklore.
Part1 – Armageddon :
Black has draw odds and thus has a ( huge ) advantage and thus has lower time.
- This eliminates BOTH white advantage & draws. Specifically : Armageddon eliminates draws by giving black draw odds and then the draw odds eliminates white advantage because chess favours draws more than white ( or black ).
- In armageddon : Since draw odds make black more favoured, black has lower time. The amount of time can be stupidly pre-determined, or both players have an auction ( usually blind ) where the lower bid for how much time they’re willing to have ( i.e. the higher time for how much they’re willing to give up ) gets black ( unless the winning bid is insane enough to choose white … at least in chess1 ).
Part2 – Introducing semi-armageddon ( w/ auction of course ) :
You play the same game except white just has lower time.
- This eliminates just white advantage.
- In semi-armageddon : There are no draw odds. Since white is more favoured, white has lower time. The amount of time can be stupidly pre-determined, or both players have an auction where the lower bid gets white.
Part3 – Notes :
- I believe semi-armageddon is better than pie rule ( or cake rule ) for balancing chess w/o getting rid of draws.
- 1.1 – I don’t believe pie rule works at all for 9LX.
- Semi-armageddon can solve the issue of single round robins & single swiss ( the same issue w/c shows the hypocrisy of chess ) tournaments w/o getting rid of draws :
- 2.1 – Normally, it’s not that players are randomly assigned colours for each round but that players do get a near even amount of games of white & black. But still, it’s necessarily uneven for round robins of an even number of players. And even ( lol ) in an odd round robin, any single player might’ve done better if not for luck of the draw. This also has implications for head-to-head score. In chessgames.com, they don’t count colour in summary statistics of head-to-head between 2 players. This wouldn’t matter if games were played in pairs like in knockouts or double round robins, but tournaments are often single round robin or single swiss!
- 2.2 – A double round robin or double swiss where each pair of players gets to alternate colours, like in the candidates ( eg 2022, 1962 ), would be fair. (Also, quadruple, sextuple, n-tuple for any even natural number n.)
- 2.2.1 – I’ve never heard of double swiss. Like, what, you play new opponent and then the next day you play them again but reversed colours? I think then semi-armageddon swiss makes more sense than double swiss. I think of 1st rounds of a swiss where you lose so badly that you know Gasai you’re going to lose the next day even if you were black today s.t. you’re white tomorrow. Or maybe hybrid : 1st rounds of swiss could be semi-armageddon. ( But if you’re going to do this for 1st round, then why not for all the rounds? )
- Another way is of course semi-armageddon to eliminate the concept of white vs black. Like baseball but it doesn’t matter which if you’re batting or fielding. Csgo / cs2 / cs / Counterstrike or valorant but it doesn’t matter if you’re CT or terrorist. Tennis but it doesn’t matter if you serve or not. But in these cases what they bid is probably points or cards drawn rather than time similar to go / baduk‘s komi, w/c I understand is more like if chess used pie rule. ( So ‘pie rule’ makes sense in all those games but not chess! )
- You can have an odd number of games in matches. Such matches can be won by a point without having a 0.5 or 1/2 in the score. Eg the 2010 classical WCC could’ve been 6-5 instead of 6.5-5.5 by having 11 games instead of 12 games. ( But well, you could win by a point by pairing games into mini-matches and then counting points by winning mini-matches. )
Shortlink : https://wp.me/p1w4Rr-3ad
Post ID : p1w4Rr-3ad
Mathematiciowned 