As some know, I am organising a standard tournament for juniors at the end of the month. I have not yet finalised the format of the event beyond rounds (5) and timing (60+30).
Keep in mind that my main goal is to have the children play enjoyable as many games as possible relevant to their levels.
My options are:
- Multiple all-play all sections: rejected as this requires precise multiples of 6, and any no-show or bye is extremely disruptive
- 2 grade based sections: rejected as grades are currently 18+ months out of date, online grade conversion is an art more than a science, and I'd rather not arbitrarily decide who belongs where (and possibly enter in arguments). Also I risk having 2 odd numbered sections.
- Single Swiss section: given the field at hand, I expect the first round to be un-interesting games with 400+ estimated rating difference on many boards. Also, I wouldn't be surprised that some players start with 3 defeats in a row and would be disheartened/resign. In a normal tournament, that would be ok but I want to ensure they all play as many relevant games as possible.
- Acceleration (Baku or otherwise): seems to be an ideal solution: it ensure initially that strong players and weaker player play each others (more relevant games), and eventually if a player does very well/poorly, they will be paired against stronger/weaker players. Also, the bottom players who get a 1 point bye will not automatically face the top half of the board. The main issue I can see is explaining it to the participants.
- If I use acceleration, does it have to be Baku (which I believe is the FIDE sanctioned method) in order to be graded by the ECF?
- will Baku achieve my goals on a 5 rounds tournament, with players ranging from 1300 (est.) to 1900+(est.)? As I understand that will give 2 rounds with 1 point acceleration and 1 round with 0.5 point, leaving 2 un-accelerated rounds (1-1-1/2-0-0 ) ?
- Assuming I can use a non-Baku method, would any other acceleration work better? (maybe 1-1-0-0-0 or 1-1/2-0-0-0 ? )