24-Game 3-Move WCM?

General Discussion about the game of Checkers.

24-Game 3-Move WCM?

Postby Richard Pask on Wed Oct 04, 2017 10:56 am

Dear Alex,

Why not be even more radical and reduce WCMs at 3-move to 24 games?

I'm sure a quick survey can be undertaken of the 29 matches played to date (1934-2017) to see the state of play in each case after 24 games. (Not that this is the whole story.)

This way a match could be completed in a week (6 x 4 games: Monday-Saturday).

Any less would be an insufficient test, but 24 may just be enough.
Richard Pask
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:15 pm

Re: 24-Game 3-Move WCM?

Postby Alex_Moiseyev on Wed Oct 04, 2017 1:13 pm

Richard, I thought a lot about this. 32 cut off is good number in my eyes, because as I mentioned in my email - title never changed hands after game#32.

However if you start reduce this number and look at matches progress - you can see that sometime very important things happened before G32.

What was 1st game which M. Tinsley won in his historic match 1955 with W. Hellman ? 26!! What was score in my match with Borghetti in 2013 after 28 games ? Even !! I equalized match score with Ron King in 2009 only at G28!

32 seems to me as good compromise number which still keep an open opportunity for future generations.

24 games don't really generate a good chance for "comeback", but 32 - does!

I don't like too radical changes at the moment. But 32 instead 40 after 80+ years - good step forward.

AM
I am playing checkers, not chess.
User avatar
Alex_Moiseyev
 
Posts: 4082
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:03 pm

Re: 24-Game 3-Move WCM?

Postby Alex_Moiseyev on Wed Oct 04, 2017 6:05 pm

We had today very interesting tread on Facebook regarding potential change to 3-moves World Title Matches format. There were good pro- and contra- arguments, but overall It seems like 32 is a good compromise number and soft adjustment, which can improve things without touching the base and changing basic concepts and traditions. Everyone was somehow satisfy with 32. Radical changes (24 games) had couple more supporters but much more opponents including myself.

I submitted my motion and proposals to WCDF Board for review and voting. Will see how it goes.

When I submitted my motion, I predicted that there might be some people who will support an idea of players getting weaker and losing quality of games at the end of match. Today I had a chance to see such guy :D :D

Alex
I am playing checkers, not chess.
User avatar
Alex_Moiseyev
 
Posts: 4082
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:03 pm

Re: 24-Game 3-Move WCM?

Postby Richard Pask on Thu Oct 05, 2017 2:59 am

I'm happy to go along with the majority view Alex: and you certainly have a lot of experience playing lengthy matches.
Richard Pask
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:15 pm

Re: 24-Game 3-Move WCM?

Postby Alex_Moiseyev on Thu Oct 05, 2017 9:30 am

Let see how WCDF decide to handle it. In my eyes this change will be beneficiary for players, checkers and Federation.

It will also make it a bit easy bidding processing and financial aspects of matches.

AM

===========================================================================================================
My old friend William Docherty said that 16 opening (instead 20) maybe less sufficient for testing. This is good point indeed, but as I said before - statistics for more then 80+ years and 28 World Matches shows clearly that this is enough distance to determine best player in match. This was proved by ALL matches since 1934!
I am playing checkers, not chess.
User avatar
Alex_Moiseyev
 
Posts: 4082
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:03 pm

Re: 24-Game 3-Move WCM?

Postby Bill Salot on Thu Oct 05, 2017 4:08 pm

Alex,

Ed Atkinson, one of the checkerists unable to post messages on this Forum, wrote me the following comment about 32-game matches:

"There has been discussion on the forum about decreasing the number of games to 32 for three move title matches. If that had been the rule for the 1948 Hellman-Long match, Long would have won, 1-0-31. Ryan would have lost to Hellman in 1949. I think that the GAYP title matches should be increased to 32 games."

Is Ed mistaken?

Bill Salot
Bill Salot
 
Posts: 341
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 10:57 am

Re: 24-Game 3-Move WCM?

Postby Alex_Moiseyev on Thu Oct 05, 2017 4:44 pm

Bill Salot wrote:Alex, Is Ed mistaken?
Yes and No!

First of all in match Hellman vs Ryan 1949, title did not change hands. After 32 games Hellman had big lead (+5?), but Ryan equalize score until G40! After then they played 10 more games w/o changes and Hellman retain title due to tie.

So ... we are talking now about only one match out of 28, where score was fantastically close and ANY, ANY, ANY outcome would be logical and acceptable! After 32 game Long had lead, after 40 game score was even. After G47 Hellman got lead and won match after 50 games. What happen if they just play 60 games ? ... anything possible. So, after G32 title changed hands only in G47, not 40!

1 match out of 28 - 3.5%.

I have no problems to consider Long as best player in 1948 after 32 games.

And now, due to this one of the closest matches in checkers history with controversy in the air, we have to continue to play long matches in 21st century ?!

Uncertain situation with World Title in 1948-1949 was unique where I consider Ryan as big victim of controversy

AM
I am playing checkers, not chess.
User avatar
Alex_Moiseyev
 
Posts: 4082
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:03 pm

Re: 24-Game 3-Move WCM?

Postby Richard Pask on Fri Oct 06, 2017 7:06 am

DEO was strongly of the opinion that 24 games was ideal for Freestyle, where, after all, you can't say you were unlucky to get a series of ballots which didn't suit.

At one point - 1991 - it was likely that DEO would play Asa Long for the world 3-move title, and, because of the latter's advanced age, a shorter number of games was being suggested. (24 or 32)

Personally, I was totally against the 'age' argument, but I can see a lot of strength in Alex's 32-games suggestion for 3-move. I am certain it is a fair test of ability: William Docherty's opinion carries a lot of weight but I guess a halt has to be called somewhere.

Incidentally, Don Lafferty actually drew his last man-machine match with Chinook, as originally scheduled: 24 draws. However, playing on in blocks of 4 games was inevitably going to favour the machine 1-0 & 31 draws. (That said, had Don not chosen to step out for a win, we might have had 40 draws!)

Incidentally, can someone run through all 29 WCM stating how the outcome would have been affected: I'm happy to do this if necessary. (It's not the whole story, but it is relevant.)
Richard Pask
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:15 pm

Re: 24-Game 3-Move WCM?

Postby Alex_Moiseyev on Fri Oct 06, 2017 9:07 am

Richard Pask wrote:Incidentally, can someone run through all 29 WCM stating how the outcome would have been affected: I'm happy to do this if necessary. (It's not the whole story, but it is relevant.)
Dear Richard, I think it would be a great thing to do and very helpful tool for WCDF and GA to make a right decision.

Such careful scientific research and analyses of all matches progress will be vey interesting and informative. You have to track number of game where title changed hands during the course of match.

It is also interesting to test "players tiredness" at the end of match: percentage of WDL during different time of match + number of moves made in the game!!

AM
I am playing checkers, not chess.
User avatar
Alex_Moiseyev
 
Posts: 4082
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:03 pm

Re: 24-Game 3-Move WCM?

Postby Richard Pask on Sat Oct 07, 2017 7:05 am

Dear Alex,

I've just spent 2 hours inputting the info you requested. However, when it came to submitting my post, the system wouldn't let me!! (All lost.)

However, here is the summary:

29 matches played 1934-2017

Effect of 32 games rather than 40:

26 matches: no effect on the outcome

1948: After 32 games, Long would have won; after 40, Long would have drawn; after 50, Long lost. (So Long!)
1949: After 32 games, Hellman would have won; after 40, he would have drawn; after 50, it was still a draw.
1996: After 32 games, Lafferty would have won; after 40, it was a draw.

My conclusion: Alex's suggestion is good.
Richard Pask
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:15 pm

Re: 24-Game 3-Move WCM?

Postby George Hay on Sat Oct 07, 2017 8:31 am

1948 Challenger Walter Hellman upsets Champion Asa Long by a score of 2-1-47. Hellman becomes the new World Champion.
1949 Challenger Willie Ryan ties Champion Walter Hellman by a score of 4-4-42, Hellman retains the Title.
1996 Champion Ron King comes back to tie Challenger Don Lafferty by a score of 5-5-30, King retains his Crown.

Unless I missed something, 1948 and 1949 were the only years where the 3-Move WCM was up to 50 games. Even the first two 3-move WCM's in 1934 and 1936 (both won by Asa Long) were up to 40 games. All other 3-Move WCM's are evidently up to 40 games. OMOCH gives the 1962 Asa Long vs Walter Hellman match at 2-2-36 while the AFC website lists it at 2-2-26. In 1962 Hellman was Champion and ties go to the Champion.

My heart would like to see 40 game matches, but my head sees the practical reality of logistics and costs favoring a 32 game match.
Also, and most important, the integrity of a true contest for the World Championship would be preserved with a match up to 32 games.

--just one duffer's opining, George Hay
George Hay
 
Posts: 806
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 7:41 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA

Re: 24-Game 3-Move WCM?

Postby Bill Salot on Sat Oct 07, 2017 12:52 pm

Ed Atkinson asked me to post this response to George Hay:

"The 1948 and 1949 matches were up to 40 games with provision for 10 additional games in case of a tie after 40 games. Thus they both went to 50 games. Ryan came close to winning game 40. See World Championship Checkers."
Bill Salot
 
Posts: 341
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 10:57 am

Re: 24-Game 3-Move WCM?

Postby Bill Salot on Mon Oct 09, 2017 4:43 pm

Ed Atkinson asked me to post this if I thought it relevant:

"The second Hellman-Long match, 1962 was tied at the end of 40 games. Long waived his right to play 10 more games. The match had already gone 3 days past schedule due to many long games, some lasting 4 hours or more.

Not long before his untimely death Ryan published a statement saying that if he won his return match with Hellman he had arranged to play a 40 game match with Basil Case. In case of a tie, they would play additional games in blocks of 4 until the tie was broken. This could possibly result in a very long match.

Nowadays there are 19 more openings than were in use in those days, some of them very hard Would it make sense to have 32 game 3 move WCMs with a provision for play off games in blocks of 4 to a 40 game limit in case of a tie?"
Bill Salot
 
Posts: 341
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 10:57 am


Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests

class=