![[Welcome to Sensei's Library!]](images/stone-hello.png "Sensei's Library")
This is mainly a question for Robert Jasiek, who was involved in writing the EGF tournament system rules:
Is there a recommendation about which of SOS, SOS-1 and SOS-2 to use at what number of rounds?
In a tournament with only a small number of rounds, it would seem that discarding data could lower the confidence of the SOS instead of increasing it. For example, in a three round tournament, using SOS-2 is equal to "Who was your highest scoring opponent".
Is there a recommendation like "Up to 3 rounds, use SOS. Up to 5 rounds use SOS-1. With 6 rounds and up use SOS-2" or something like that?
And have SOS-3, SOS-4, etc been considered? The Median system used in chess discards the highest and lowest score up to 9 rounds, and from there discards the highest two and lowest two.
The problem with the European Go Championship tiebreakers is the superbar, which ruins SOS and MMS. Pity the committee couldn't admit this. - IanDavis
RobertJasiek: The superbar is for great parts a politically dictated issue. It has nothing to do with the commission's ability to admit something here. Anyway, what exactly do you criticise?
It is an observation that the rules committee made a decision (I believe it to be flawed, imaginary politics) which adversely affects the tiebreakers used normally in tournaments. -IanDavis
RobertJasiek: Do you criticise the superbar of the EGC or the bar of ordinary MacMahon tournaments? This is a big difference politically because the EGC tournament rules change proposed by the rules commission was not - as you suggest - rejected by itself but by the Annual General Meeting.
The AGM voted for a sensible system to be agreed upon by the strong players in Europe. Very sensible. You forget to provide evidence that the superbar is maintained for political reasons. -IanDavis
RobertJasiek: The AGM vote means in practice that the old EGC tournament system with its 4d bar and possibly great number of strong Asians is still valid. - The "evidence" was discussed inside the commission but not for the purpose of publication. So you have to live with my personal "opinion": There are supposed to be too many national associations who would not like to see the bar increased because then their national players would have yet smaller chances.