[zasanya]

In a tournament there were 29 teams. The format was swiss league 7 preliminary rounds. Top 8 teams to play a final play off round Robin to decide the final top place ranking. A team got a bue in round 3. In my country the team which gets a bye is deemed to have got 12 vps and the draw is made accordingly. While deciding the final ranking the team which had received 12 vps for the bye had 62.88 in remaining 6 rounds. They finished at 8 th place by virtue of the 12 vps awarded for 3rd round bye. It is the contention of the 9 th placed team that the 12 vps are only for convenience of making the draw. While deciding the final rank they should be given their average ( 62.88/6=10.48) for the 6 rounds actually played and not 12. In that case the 9th placed team would have finished in the top
Is their merit in this argument? Are their any wbf guidelines?
Zasanya.

[blackshoe]

Do the Conditions of Contest for this event cover the question?

[zasanya]

No

[blackshoe]

Then it is up to the TD to interpret. If the CoC do not specifically state that the 12 vps is only for the convenience of making the draw, then I would do as your TD apparently did.

[ggwhiz]

Ouch. They certainly have a point fairness wise but knew the conditions and accepted them at the start of the event. I give them sympathy but that's all.

Pro rated vp's from the played matches is probably more like it next year and I'll name the CoC clause after them but it slows the matchups and makes them awkward. The 8th placed team arguably got a tougher draw than they deserved for the last 4 matches. On that basis the status quo is ok too.

[wank]

in which round did they get the bye?

if it was in a late/the last round, the ninth team have a point, but it would be the organisers' fault for giving a bye to a team in contention at the end.

byes should be given to the lowest ranked teams.

on the early rounds this might result in a team which turns out to be in contention getting a bye, but that's not an issue because it's self-correcting. they got 2 free VPs relative to the field, but they were punished by the swiss system and had to play harder opps, so then the 9th team have no cause this complaint.

[aguahombre]

The OP stated the bye occurred in round three.

[newmoon]

The system of allocating 12 VPs to a team that has a bye is fair and just in a swiss movement.

The contentious bye occurred in round 3 - at that stage it was too early to determine eventual qualifiers; and if a team is in contention nearing the end of the movement, they will never have a bye as the bye team is accumulating 8 VPs per match and is always ranked 40%.

You cannot retrospectively calculate averages for each team at the 7-round mark then allocate this average to the bye that took place in round 3. In a swiss, scores going forward should be firm and unchangeable, unless there is a late appeal of some sort - then too it is but one match in arrear.

[axman]

ggwhiz, on 2016-June-19, 11:02, said:

Ouch. They certainly have a point fairness wise but knew the conditions and accepted them at the start of the event. I give them sympathy but that's all.

Pro rated vp's from the played matches is probably more like it next year and I'll name the CoC clause after them but it slows the matchups and makes them awkward. The 8th placed team arguably got a tougher draw than they deserved for the last 4 matches. On that basis the status quo is ok too.

Not having the standards for byes, then presuming that byes go to the dregs, the late appeal to emotion does not hold much water. Had #8 instead played round 3, it would have been against a dreg; the expected outcome of #8 against a dreg would be a blitz garnering considerably more VPs than 12: and thus expect #9 to not be in the money, but be further in the cold.

[mgoetze]

wank, on 2016-June-19, 15:03, said:

on the early rounds this might result in a team which turns out to be in contention getting a bye, but that's not an issue because it's self-correcting. they got 2 free VPs relative to the field, but they were punished by the swiss system and had to play harder opps, so then the 9th team have no cause this complaint.

Exactly, deducting VPs later would be grossly unfair to the team that had the bye.