Re: Two questions..........

• From: valhalla12 <no_reply_at_yahoogroups.com>
• Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 23:10:10 -0000
• Message-ID: <a9554i+77s7_at_...>

Hmmm.. ok, that is a very interesting response. I didn't know that 
the USCF had gone back to the Holland system. Thanks for the response 
and maybe I should actually spend a little bit more of my spare time 
(what there is) playing chess and not so much on quiz bowl.......... 
Naaahhh :)


--- In quizbowl_at_y..., Andrew Feist <feistatduke_at_y...> wrote:
> The USCF (US Chess Federation) prefers the Holland
> system (what NAQT used) to the Swiss even today, in
> those limited circumstances where it is practical, and
> last I checked the USCF Championships are held that
> way.  There's no reason not to do it in a Holland,
> since I don't think NAQT was having difficulties
> coming up with questions.  Provided provisions are
> made to ensure that the original pools are balanced
> (which NAQT presumably uses its super-secret rankings
> for), the Holland will generally give better results
> than a Swiss, albeit with more games needed.
> 
> The "optimal" number of games for a Swiss would have
> been 5 for Div II and 6 for Div I. Any fewer, and
> there would not have been a unique team at the top;
> more, and you not only lose unique team at the top
> again, but you have the situation where the teams
> sitting at 7-1 have already played all the teams at
> 6-2 (and maybe even 5-3) and have to play down quite a
> bit to find an oppponent.
> 
> --
> Andrew Feist
> USCF-certified tournament director
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/