Rules of the tournament for 2022

[Krzysztof Grzelak]

Aim of the game

- selecting the best computer program in the draughts tournament
- popularization of computer of programs in International draughts

Organizer

Krzysztof Grzelak - Poland

System of the game

- the tournament will be played the system " round - robin " a distance of thirty four rounds
- the place of the program in the tournament is determined by the highest number of points scored in the tournament - the largest number of games won and the coefficient Sonneborn - Berger
- time of a game - 10 minutes + 10 seconds on 85 moves
- all programs are set to 10 minutes for 85 moves, an additional 10 seconds have been added to perform moves on the DGT Draughts E-Board
- the tournament scoring - for winning 2 points, for draw 1 point, for defeat 0 points
- every day 2 rounds will be played
- there will be a one day non gaming day in the tournament

The time and the place of the game

- the tournament will start 1 September 2022 in the town Kórnik in Poland
- the start time of the tournament - 8:00 Central European Summer Time

The draw

- a game is considered a draw when the same position occurs for the third time, with the same player having to move
- if during 25 successive moves, only the kings have moved, without any man moving or without any capture, the game is considered drawn
- if only three kings remain, two king plus a man, one king and two men, against one king, the game shall be considered a draw when the players have each played another sixteen moves maximum
- the end game with two kings, one king and a man, or one king against one king will be considered a draw when the players have played another five moves maximum

Concluding remarks

- judge main tournament - Krzysztof Grzelak
- in exceptional situations due to technical problems - the game can be repeated
- program that becomes corrupted during a game - loses the game
- every programmer can change versions of its software twice during tournament
- change the software version should be followed in the evening by electronic mail
- the tournament will be played live using the board DGT Draughts E-Board
- the tournament will run the program DraughtsArbiter Pro

If anyone has any comments and observations - please write.

Krzysztof

[clp]

Hallo Krzysztof,

My suggestion is to add a paragraph on tie-break criteria, when players have the same score points.

I wish you success and a great tournament.

Best regards,
Kees Pippel

[Krzysztof Grzelak]

Hallo Krzysztof,

My suggestion is to add a paragraph on tie-break criteria, when players have the same score points.

I wish you success and a great tournament.

Best regards,
Kees Pippel

Thank you for your answer. For now, I am wondering how to write it correctly and wisely.

[pontel]

Hallo Krzysztof,

My suggestion is to add a paragraph on tie-break criteria, when players have the same score points.

I wish you success and a great tournament.

Best regards,
Kees Pippel

Olá, no sistema round-robin já há critérios para definir o melhor colocado em caso de mesma pontuação. São basicamente três critérios:
01 Confronto direto, caso haja apenas dois competidores com a mesma pontuação.
02 número de vitórias
03 Sonnenborn-Berger que é o desempenho de cada competidor enfrentado.

[clp]

The current default settings for round robin tournaments in DraughtsArbiterPro (and FMJD recommendations) are:

1. Total Score
2. Number of Wins
3. Direct encounter
4. Better result with the best opponents
5. Manual Tiebreak

My personal preference for a tournament between computer engines is: Better result with the best opponents (2), Number of Wins (3).

[Krzysztof Grzelak]

Hello clp,

if I write like this:
the following tiebreaker criteria apply in the tournament:
- Total Score
- Number of Wins
- Better result with the best opponents

Will it be correct and well spelled.

[Ed Gilbert]

I don't understand why you want number of wins to be the first tiebreak. IMO it should be the fewest losses. I can see number of wins for human tournaments, but in computer draughts the number of wins is mostly dependent on whether the weaker opponents made losing moves or not against you, which they seem to do somewhat randomly. So for the strong programs, number of wins is a lot of random luck, but if a "strong" program has any losses at all, that is not luck, that's bad, it means the program made a bad move, so that makes it a better criteria for tiebreaks.

-- Ed

[Krzysztof Grzelak]

I don't understand why you want number of wins to be the first tiebreak. IMO it should be the fewest losses. I can see number of wins for human tournaments, but in computer draughts the number of wins is mostly dependent on whether the weaker opponents made losing moves or not against you, which they seem to do somewhat randomly. So for the strong programs, number of wins is a lot of random luck, but if a "strong" program has any losses at all, that is not luck, that's bad, it means the program made a bad move, so that makes it a better criteria for tiebreaks.

-- Ed

Ed, the first criterion is Total Score. Write, Ed, what do you think the tournament criteria should be.

[Ed Gilbert]

Ed, the first criterion is Total Score.

Total score is the primary ordering criteria, not a tiebreak criteria. The others are tiebreak criteria.

[Krzysztof Grzelak]

The current default settings for round robin tournaments in DraughtsArbiterPro (and FMJD recommendations) are:

1. Total Score
2. Number of Wins
3. Direct encounter
4. Better result with the best opponents
5. Manual Tiebreak

My personal preference for a tournament between computer engines is: Better result with the best opponents (2), Number of Wins (3).

Ed, here you have the basic criteria tie break.

[Ed Gilbert]

I would change the ordering to:

Total Score
Fewest Number of Losses
Direct encounter
Better result with the best opponents
Manual Tiebreak

[Krzysztof Grzelak]

I would change the ordering to:

Total Score
Fewest Number of Losses
Direct encounter
Better result with the best opponents
Manual Tiebreak

Ed, there is no such Fewest Number of Losses option. There is Win/Lost Games. But it's probably not the same.

[Ed Gilbert]

If the tournament program cannot do "fewest number of losses", then I would use clp's suggestion:

"My personal preference for a tournament between computer engines is: Better result with the best opponents (2), Number of Wins (3)."

[Ed Gilbert]

The point is that "number of wins" is not a good tiebreak criteria because it is based quite a bit on random luck, ie. the randomness with which weaker programs make losing moves.

[Krzysztof Grzelak]

If the tournament program cannot do "fewest number of losses", then I would use clp's suggestion:

"My personal preference for a tournament between computer engines is: Better result with the best opponents (2), Number of Wins (3)."

I have it done as in the picture below.



Could it be like that.