Matches for the British Championship?

[Graham Borrowdale]

Sounds like the FIDE cycle being reinvented...

I like matches as well, but I am not sure it would grip the public as much as the 11-round swiss does.

On a practical note, the loser of the match would presumably be shut out of next year's match, assuming it is played alongside the open, which as you say would be part of the draw for spectators. In other words you get a two-yearly shot at most

[Roger de Coverly]

Swiss tournaments are not well understood, I suspect.

Maybe not, but a possible cultural export to other activities like dodgy metaphors.

Any sporting or competitive event where
(a) competitors are expected to play to the end
(b) games/matches can take place simultaneously
(c) there are too many entrants for an all play all
could be run as a Swiss

I'm not sure whether three results (win/draw/loss) are needed to make the theory work. If you have draws, a knock out format is always problematic.

Winners meet winners, losers meet losers, everyone takes part should be an easy concept.

Going back to the 1960s though, wouldn't it have been repetitive after a while watching Penrose splat people? He could regularly beat Hartston, it was only Keene of his late sixties, early seventies challengers who could have gone head to head with a reasonable prospect of success.

In recent years, if Adams was prepared to be the champion and Short the challenger, wouldn't it always have been the same match every other year? If the event wasn't well enough funded to attract either of them, then there could have been numerous winners. Possibly Rowson would have been able to fend off challenges until Howell or Jones came through.

[Jonathan Bryant]

... it was only Keene of his late sixties, early seventies challengers who could have gone head to head with a reasonable prospect of success.

That Penrose bottled a direct challenge to a match from RDK in (iirc) 1970 tells you that Raymondo had a more than 'reasonable' prospect of success by that time.

I'd like the era of the challenge to a match to come back, but I doubt it will somehow. I kind of like the idea of a match to decide the British Championship too, but one year seems far too long a gap between challenging and getting to play.

[Alan Walton]

Swiss tournaments are not well understood, I suspect.

I would kind of agree with this, the general point that comes across when I speak with my non-playing friends they always are under the impression that in tournaments you get knocked out when you lose, I then have to spend a few minutes explaining the Swiss system and you can see them getting bored quite quickly

[Greg Breed]

...the general point that comes across when I speak with my non-playing friends they always are under the impression that in tournaments you get knocked out when you lose, I then have to spend a few minutes explaining the Swiss system and you can see them getting bored quite quickly

Clearly the friends you are explaining it to are not interested in what you have to say anyway. The swiss system is rather like a league and the graded sections can be akin to divisions. The only difference is that they aren't all-play-all.

As RdC said

Winners meet winners, losers meet losers, everyone takes part should be an easy concept.

[Alan Walton]

...the general point that comes across when I speak with my non-playing friends they always are under the impression that in tournaments you get knocked out when you lose, I then have to spend a few minutes explaining the Swiss system and you can see them getting bored quite quickly

Clearly the friends you are explaining it to are not interested in what you have to say anyway. The swiss system is rather like a league and the graded sections can be akin to divisions. The only difference is that they aren't all-play-all.

As RdC said

Winners meet winners, losers meet losers, everyone takes part should be an easy concept.

They are interested in what and how well I do, but generally they are not that interested in the finer details of the Swiss system, my normal reply nowadays is you play every round against somebody on the same score

[Greg Breed]

...the general point that comes across when I speak with my non-playing friends they always are under the impression that in tournaments you get knocked out when you lose, I then have to spend a few minutes explaining the Swiss system and you can see them getting bored quite quickly

Clearly the friends you are explaining it to are not interested in what you have to say anyway. The swiss system is rather like a league and the graded sections can be akin to divisions. The only difference is that they aren't all-play-all.

As RdC said

Winners meet winners, losers meet losers, everyone takes part should be an easy concept.

They are interested in what and how well I do, but generally they are not that interested in the finer details of the Swiss system, my normal reply nowadays is you play every round against somebody on the same score

An even more simple explanation - I like it!