Discussing format changes for the OGS July Team League

Tournaments
#3
  1. Players / team.

4 players is good for me. With fewer players, ranks would be too spread out in each category. Or we could allow 4/5-player mix.

  1. Round duration: I like 1 month.

  2. Game length. I am happy with 30 min + 5x30s. As a player I’d prefer longer times, but as a spectator 30 min + 5x30 is better.

  3. Ruleset. Default Japanese, optional Chinese & others .

  4. Komi in handicap games. 0.5 is standard.

  5. Handicap. The simplest is H = ΔR -1 (maximum 9 stones): a 5k plays even against a 6k, gives 1 stone to a 7k,…, gives 9 stones to a 15k and weaker.

  6. Rank balancing. I wrote my opinion here: OGS June Team League - #118 by jlt

2 Likes
#4

I only just realised that next month is July, not August… :D

2 Likes
#5

H = ΔR -1 (maximum 9 stones)

Here’s another point of discussion.

Personally, I prefer uncapped handicap, but I hope that the boards won’t be unbalanced enough for this to become a practical concern.

Also, if we have uncapped handicap but mandatory standard placement then we’ll have to invent new standard placements for 10+ stones, like my 13-stone and 16-stone formations.

2 Likes
#6
  1. No real preference
  2. A month seems fine (and it sounds cool to have a “July League”, “August League” etc.)
  3. 30m seems fine and is standard. I won’t cry if it’s 45m.
  4. Chinese default, Japanese optional
  5. 0.5 seems standard
  6. Difficult… I agree with the “1 handicap/rank” rule, as I feel your initial formula is hopeless for the weaker player (maybe I’m wrong though). On the nature of handicap, could we possibly imagine a mix of reverse komi and stones ? Like reverse komi up to -20, then stones (or the reverse) ? I feel like it would help balance the awkwardness of extreme handicaps.
  7. Not much to say, this is a practical issue more than a theoretical one.
2 Likes
#7

Too much work, I am good with whatever you guys decide. :grinning:

I like Japanese ruleset only because it is the default. Again, I am lazy and whichever is fine.

#8

Uncapped is fine for me too.

If instead of handicap stones we choose reverse komi, Black should get 14(ΔR -1)-6.5 komi if ΔR is at least 2. So

  • If players are of equal rank or if the rank difference is 1: even game with 6.5 komi for White.
  • If rank difference = 2: Black gets 7.5 points komi.
  • If rank difference = 3: Black gets 21.5 komi.
  • If rank difference = 4: Black gets 35.5 komi.
    …
  • If rank difference = 10: Black gets 119.5 komi
    …
    This may be capped or not.
1 Like
#9

I’d be interested in joining this shindig. I don’t have a team and not sure if I’d be able to form one. Anyways, I’ll note myself as a free agent in case there is a team looking for a replacement.

3 Likes
#10

I have never understood your formula, jlt, and I don’t think I’m going to understand it now.

No matter how many times you say that a difference of one rank is fourteen points, I know that is not correct. A 5k does not give an 8k fourteen more points than he gives a 7k.

I find Gia’s proposed system of a simple six points / rank much more practical. Complicated formulae are not suitable for application…

#11

My formula is not complicated, I could make a table like in Gia’s post. My point is that 6 points per rank is too little. For instance in Gia’s table, a 1k is supposed to give 48.5 komi to a 10k, this is definitely too small. In my table I would put 105.5 komi, which would be more realistic.

To convince yourself about this, open Katago, let Black play 9 times and White pass 9 times. Then Katago expects Black to win by 126 points.

2 Likes
#12

On the handicap, can we adjust based upon the results of the June one?

I don’t have confidence at all to play with only 2 stones against 4-5d as a 1kyu, but we will see. we have three 1kyu and 3 4-5 d. If the results overwhelmingly favor one side, we can adjust i guess.

#13

OK, but could you please try to rearrange or approximate

komi = 14(ΔR -1)-6.5

into the form

komi = NΔR

or

komi = NΔR+/–X

or

komi = NΔ(R–X)

You have a lot of operations going on. Could we keep them down to three or ideally two?

I’d appreciate something everyone can understand at a glance, so we can be sure of what your proposal is.

Please be aware that not everyone in the league has the same level of mathematical literacy.

#14

What I’d personally be in favour of is allowing Black to choose his preferred handicap mode for the league.

In the registration period, every player would specify whether they wished their handicap as either

  1. Set handicap stones

  2. Freely placed handicap stones

  3. Reverse komi

and that information would be appended to them in the relevant places, and would apply to all their games in that month’s edition.

I see organisational issues in mixing stones with reverse komi in a single handicap, so I’d suggest we hold off on that idea for now.

#16

I suggest:

  • If ΔR = 0 or 1: play even game (with 6.5 komi for White).
  • If ΔR is between 2 and 11, Black gets 14 ΔR - 20.5 komi.
  • If ΔR is 11 or larger, Black gets 133.5 points komi.

Capture
Capture1626×705 277 KB

3 Likes
#17

But we should set a ruleset to look serious. No major tournament uses various rulesets.

#18

We can think about the first formula as well, obviously, and poll it.

Don’t worry, everything will be voted on on the 20th–22nd :D (or perhaps before if discussion tails off).

#19

I was going to open voting tomorrow, but I’m not sure how interested people are… better to do it later, perhaps.

#20

How do people feel about handicap minus one? i.e. in a game with rank difference 6 the lower rated player gets 5 stones.

I feel that the half handicap is generous to the higher rated player. Out of curiosity, has any of the handicap games resulted in favour of the lower rated player?

#21

Yes I (2k) lost a game without komi against ngothonghy (4k) but in our game, “handicap minus one” was equal to half handicap.

1 Like
#22

Are you interested in participating in a OGS team league? (For example in august, similar to the june OGS team league)

  • Yes
  • No

0 voters

For reference:

#23

I’m generally interested to continue but will skip the next one due to vacation.

1 Like