I would like a fair chance of winning a tournament
I have always hated handicaps, so I am surely biased, but first things first - handicap does not give you a “fair” chance, it gives you an “equal” chance (which is a big differene in my opinion). You do not shoot the fastest runner in olympics in the foot, to make it more fair now, do you…
I would much rather see any other solution to offer better fighting chances (or more appeal) than handicap - which I hate. Having special DDK tournaments sounds eaisest, but perhaps there is more to do, some special pairings whatever…
In my absolutely personal opinion handicaps make for a lousy game.
They are harder to review for the beginner. Suddenly it is not about chosing the “best” move, it is about chosing the smart move given your initial advantage. A small move may be the winning decision as you may be losing points, but if you have enough to begin with it may be better than risking a sequence you do not know. The whole order of the game is upset, no chance to learn fuseki as there are already stones that “shouln’t” be there.
They are not rewarding at all (for me at least). If I beat a much stronger player with HC it will always feel I just won because the advantage was too big, not because I played better. That is no way to win a tournament.
They are harder to learn from or even promote bad habits. I don’t care what anybody says, given a big enough handicap (rank difference) the stronger player will be forced to overplay or try trick moves. If it works, you feel like you won because of a trick plus your opponent might think the move was valid. Sucks for both
Handicaps make sense (to me) if you are playing the same player (say a pupil) multiple times. That way you can see a progression and the weaker player can feel rewarded as he/she is slowly getting less and less stones as he/she is getting better. In an isolated example (a tournament game) this never happens.
You can already do that… In the upper right of the automatch there is a setting cog.
Me too I prefer handicap games stay out of tournaments and be kept for teaching purpose.
Now there is a lot to discuss about the reasons you don’t like handicap games (Not discussing a simple matter of taste).
Smart vs Best move: That’s not something specific to handicap game, there are smart moves in even games and best moves in handicap.
Being able to consider both kind of moves matters as a fundamental to practice.
No fuseki: yes but still there is a lot to learn from each handicap, as much as there are specific writing or chapters devoted to guide the players. And what you practice can be applied to even games later (mostly the use of influence).
Not rewarding: Handicap let you play a 9 levels difference with a winning goal at least. I felt very rewarded the first time I did that.
Overplay/Tricks: If white need to use these, better lower the handicap.
It’s not a question of whether handicap works, but whether we should be striving for an “even” playing field for a tournament.
When I play my daily games, I want roughly even games to consistently push myself. A handicap works great for that. When I play a tournament, I’m seeking to prove my skill in a competition with other players. If I win a game with a 3-dan at a 9 stone handicap, it isn’t because I’m playing “better” than the Dan, but because I started the game with a massive advantage. Supposing that the handicap system is accurate and a 9 stone handicap is what puts me “even” with the Dan, all I’m proving with a 50% win rate is that the handicap system is calibrated properly. If I win, it’s either random chance and I really did have 50% odds each game, or because my handicap wasn’t properly assigned.
Again, those aren’t problems for regular play. I want about a 50% chance of victory in my games, and a 50% victory for everyone means nobody is getting steamrolled. If my handicap is wrong in a regular game, that’s fine too, since it will adjust up or down as I play more games. If a tournament is a test of skill, though, having a handicap, let alone an incorrectly assigned handicap, cheapens the result.
By this logic, if you have two players with roughly the same rating, they technically have 50% chance to win beforehand. Moreover, if you get a bunch of such players and play a tournament, it would be pointless, because it all comes down to whether the light reflected off the stones in the right way, or if Venus was retrograde on the sky.
Your idea of what that probability means is fundamentally flawed. Even players of different ratings don’t have a 100%-0% relationship in their chance of winning. But by that logic, they are merely playing a coin tossing game, albeit with a weighted coin.
In truth, luck is a factor in almost all things, but that does not mean it is the only factor or the most relevant. If someone plays better than usual they automatically are increasing their odds; would you call that random? I think your argument misrepresents the purpose of handicap games anyway.
Now, you may not like playing handicap, neither do I for that matter. But that is no excuse to make put forward a bogus claim in order to support your particular taste.
The factor you are highlighting is that a tournament win could be seen as a measure of absolute skill, in which case you winning against a Dan with handicap seems wrong: the tourney says you won (therefore are more skillful) wheras you know that you are less skillful than a Dan.
A solution to this is to reframe your view of what a tournament win means.
If a tournament is handicapped, then a win means that “in a situation where you had an even chance, you won”. It’s more about “how you did on the day” rather than your absolute skill.
This seems to be more sensible to me.
If you are going to seek for tournament results to reflect someone’s absolute skill compared to others, why bother playing? Why not just refer to their rank and hand out wins based on that, because this will be far more accurate: rank has the input of many games, rather than just a few in a tourney
Yes, if two players are of the same strength, the result of the game is essentially random. And if we get equally strong players to play a tournament, it’s a bit pointless (expect it’s fun). It’s a bit pointless to try to find the strongest player of the bunch if we know they’re the same strength. If they’re truly of the same strength, the result is again random. In real life we can’t have perfectly equal strength, so it’s somewhat meaningful but still most of it is up to chance.
I know. That’s why when I win against a player 5 stones stronger I don’t boast about my strength, I say I got lucky or I won by chance. I won coin tossing game.
Because we are playing a coin tossing game, weighted. And we put all our efforts into making our side heavier. Our skill, our preparation is the weight of our side. And in the game it’s my skill + luck against your skill + luck. Bigger the skill gap, less is up to chance. Smaller the skill gap, it’s more random.
And the purpose of the tournament is to find a player with the heaviest “side” of a coin. That’s why Meijin title matches have 7 games - to get more coin tosses in, to reduce the chance of lighter side getting title by luck.
And these guys say, hey, let’s reduce the effect of the skill as far as we can. Let’s make the coin as “fair” as we can. And call it competition!
Exactly describes “fair” coin flipping! I call heads!
Damn, go players are so needy. In my chess tournament days we just played even games and stronger player wins usually. And that was perfectly natural. But go players are like “hey, this gal is better than me, that’s not faair, make her stop ” You’re such babies.
The majority (about 70%) is against handicap. 25% is in favour of it.
The result didn’t come as a surprise to me, although I find it a bit disappointing and shameful.
Let’s change the direction of this topic. So let’s rephrase the question.
Another poll.
I would like to have a fair/equal chance in winning a game.
I don’t want a fair/equal chance in winning a game.
No opinion
0voters
if we don’t want handicap, do we want another way of pairing so that both players have a more or less even chance in winning a game, regardless of existing rank differences.
I hope you all put your creativity to work and share suggestions about an acceptable way of making games more fair.
I close the other poll. And I have changed the topic title.
I want both.
I’m cool with playing in tournaments where only the highest ranked players have a chance to win (which is usually the case with and without handicap), I’m cool with being paired with stronger players without handicap, as long as the game is interesting, and I’m cool with being paired with much weaker and much stronger players with handicap, because that can also make for interesting games.
I just enjoy playing interesting games and having a good mix of stronger and weaker opponents and games with and without handicap.
I get your arguments for and against handicap in tournaments, but I think, in the end it’s mostly a matter of taste. Let’s just have both. Maybe in turns, so that the number of automatic tournaments won’t double.
” You’re such babies.