| Life In 19x19 http://prod.lifein19x19.com/ |
|
| EGC 2010 Top Players Results http://prod.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1340 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | RobertJasiek [ Tue Aug 10, 2010 2:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | EGC 2010 Top Players Results |
These are the preliminary results (the final results can have slightly different SOS but not a different order) of the top players with 7+ wins. They were all in the supergroup. Unedited: Code: 1 Shikshin, Ilya 7d ru 32 12+ 4+ 10+ 6+ 5+ 11+ 2- 8+ 3- 9+ 8 309 2 Kachanovskyy, Artem 6d ua 32 16+ 27+ 3+ 5- 13+ 7+ 1+ 11+ 10+ 4- 8 307 3 Kim, Chaelim 7d kr 32 31+ 13+ 2- 25+ 9- 23+ 6+ 7+ 1+ 5+ 8 304 4 Kim, JungHyeop 7d kr 32 70+ 1- 43+ 41+ 6+ 10+ 5- 9+ 21+ 2+ 8 299 5 Kang, Kyoungnang 7d kr 31 41+ 7+ 11+ 2+ 1- 9+ 4+ 10- 18+ 3- 7 307 6 Taranu, Catalin 7d ro 31 22+ 18+ 14+ 1- 4- 57+ 3- 19+ 25+ 12+ 7 302 7 Burzo, Cornel 6d ro 31 9+ 5- 28+ 53+ 24+ 2- 12+ 3- 50+ 11+ 7 299 8 Pop, Cristian 7d ro 31 15- 100+ 26+ 12- 29+ 22+ 14+ 1- 23+ 10+ 7 295 Edited: Code: # Name d co MM Opponents W SOS 1 Shikshin 7d ru 32 12+ 4+ 10+ 6+ 5+ 11+ 2- 8+ 3- 9+ 8 309 2 Kachano. 6d ua 32 16+ 27+ 3+ 5- 13+ 7+ 1+ 11+ 10+ 4- 8 307 3 Kim Cha. 7d kr 32 31+ 13+ 2- 25+ 9- 23+ 6+ 7+ 1+ 5+ 8 304 4 Kim Jun. 7d kr 32 70+ 1- 43+ 41+ 6+ 10+ 5- 9+ 21+ 2+ 8 299 5 Kang 7d kr 31 41+ 7+ 11+ 2+ 1- 9+ 4+ 10- 18+ 3- 7 307 6 Taranu 7d ro 31 22+ 18+ 14+ 1- 4- 57+ 3- 19+ 25+ 12+ 7 302 7 Burzo 6d ro 31 9+ 5- 28+ 53+ 24+ 2- 12+ 3- 50+ 11+ 7 299 8 Pop 7d ro 31 15-100+ 26+ 12- 29+ 22+ 14+ 1- 23+ 10+ 7 295 SOS analysis: SOS minus 30 (per round) SOL (Sum of lost games round numbers) SR1 (SOS minus 30 in round 1) SR2 (SOS minus 30 in rounds 1 and 2) DCEU Direct Comparison among only Europeans Code: # Name MM Opponents' MM minus 30 W SOS-30 SOL SR1 SR2 DCEU 1 Shikshin 32 0 +2 0 +1 +1 0 +2 +1 +2 0 8 +9 16 0 +2 0 2 Kachano. 32 0 -1 +2 +1 0 +1 +2 0 0 +2 8 +7 14 0 -1 1 3 Kim Cha. 32 -1 0 +2 -1 0 -1 +1 +1 +2 +1 8 +4 8 -1 -1 NA 4 Kim Jun. 32 -3 +2 -2 -2 +1 0 +1 0 0 +2 8 -1 9 -3 -1 NA 5 Kang 31 -2 +1 0 +2 +2 0 +2 0 0 +2 7 +7 23 -2 -1 NA 6 Taranu 31 -1 0 0 +2 +2 -2 +2 0 -1 0 7 +2 16 -1 -1 NA 7 Burzo 31 0 -1 -1 -2 -1 +2 0 +2 -2 0 7 -1 16 0 -1 NA 8 Pop 31 0 -3 -1 0 -1 -1 0 +2 -1 0 7 -5 13 0 -3 NA SOL almost explains the player order according to SOS! As usual, losing in later rounds is better. DCEU would have reversed the order of the first two Europeans. SR1 (first round pairing luck) explains the order of the top two non-Europeans. Unfortunately, winners were decided by tiebreaker choice and pairing luck. ************************************************************************** Surprising 7d losses: Main tournament: Kim, Chaelim 7d - Kachanovskyy, Artem 6d Van Zeijst, Rob 7d - Corlan, Lucian 5d Weekend tournament: Dinershteyn, Alexand 7d - Debarre, Thomas 5d Rapid tournament: Kang, Kyoungnang 7d - Törmänen, Antti 6d ************************************************************************** Underranked Finnish below supergroup players playing most rounds: fi = Finland xx = other countries XX = other players Code: MMS 30 5d xx 2 XX 13 MMS 29 4d fi 4 3d fi 1 4d xx 5 XX 10 MMS 28 3d fi 3 3d xx 7 2d fi 1 2d xx 2 1d fi 1 XX 15 Conclusion: Finnish 1d to 4d is almost one rank stronger than most other EGF countries. |
|
| Author: | topazg [ Tue Aug 10, 2010 2:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: EGC 2010 Top Players Results |
RobertJasiek wrote: SOL almost explains the player order according to SOS! As usual, losing in later rounds is better. DCEU would have reversed the order of the first two Europeans. SR1 (first round pairing luck) explains the order of the top two non-Europeans. Unfortunately, winners were decided by tiebreaker choice and pairing luck. Ilya lost to someone with 8 wins and someone with 7. Artem lost to two players with 7. I'm not saying this is the right reason to award the tournament victory to Ilya, but it is the justification that SOS often awards, and it is a valid one if someone feels this is appropriate. Saying that losing in later rounds is better is indeed true - if you win your early rounds, your mid to late round matchups will be harder because the drawing system puts high performing players against each other. Therefore, your total number of wins required a higher level of performance because your draw was harder - this isn't pairing luck, it is adjusted pairing based on previous round performance. Saying that the winner was decided by anything to do with luck is unjustified; it was based on performance, with a specific set of criteria. DCEU is also based on performance, on a difference set of criteria. There's nothing wrong with either beyond subjective preference. |
|
| Author: | RobertJasiek [ Tue Aug 10, 2010 4:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: EGC 2010 Top Players Results |
Quote: Saying that losing in later rounds is better is indeed true Better for one's SOS on average over arbitrarily many tournaments. Quote: if you win your early rounds, your mid to late round matchups will be harder because the drawing system puts high performing players against each other. For a player's final SOS, "harder" means "higher current SOS in a round". The current SOS does not know what the final SOS will be. Quote: Therefore, your total number of wins required a higher level of performance because your draw was harder No. This might or might not be so. Whether the draw WAS harder is known after the tournament. DURING it, the system makes only predictions on how hard opposition will have been. Quote: this isn't pairing luck, it is adjusted pairing based on previous round performance. Since the system does not know in advance final SOS, the basis on only previous rounds performance amounts to also quite some pairing luck: the luck of how well opponents perform in later rounds. Quote: Saying that the winner was decided by anything to do with luck is unjustified; it was based on performance, with a specific set of criteria. To repeat: It is justified, see above. The performance known after the tournament by far does not give complete information for the making of pairings at the moments when they were being made round by round. The opponents' performance in later rounds is not known at the time of creating a round's pairing. This missing information's impact is the luck. (In the first two rounds, there is an additional type of luck: The missing information from earlier performance because there was none in that tournament. For other aspects of SOS, see elsewhere.) Quote: There's nothing wrong with either beyond subjective preference. To start with, what is wrong with SOS is especially its part of performance in the opponents' later rounds. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|