Direct Comparison
Direct Comparison is a tiebreaker used in go tournaments. It tries to break ties by looking only at results between the tied players, disregarding results against other players not in the tied group. Direct Comparison is the term used by the EGF. The AGA uses the term Face to Face Result in place of Direct Comparison.
The most often used case is for two tied players. If one of these players has beaten the other during the tournament, then they will be considered the winner by tiebreak.
When to use Direct Comparison
Direct Comparison cannot always be used, and is mostly useful in cases of two tied players. It is among the recommended tie breakers of both the AGA and the EGF.
Advantages of Direct Comparison
- If the case of two tied players, it is a simple tiebreaker that is easily understood by players.
- It is based solely upon the games between the tied players. (also a disadvantage)
Disadvantages of Direct Comparison
- It is only applicable for small tied groups, where all players have played all others within the group.
- In the case of more than two tied players, it is not as simple and often less easily understood by players.
- It does not consider performance over the whole tournament, instead considering only some of the games that have been played.
See DirectComparison/Discussion.
See also
- The
EGF description of Direct Comparison, note this description is very hard to understand.
- The
AGA description of Face to Face Result
-
Quality of Direct Comparison by Robert Jasiek.
RobertJasiek: Why does the edit war continue? Whoever edits the more often is right? If you list some advantages here, then list all advantages! Anything else is just partial and therefore misleading.
IanDavis: Robert, your advantages were removed for clear reasons (repeats), if you want them back use the discussion page/ discussion threads. I have left in Velocibi's advantage out of respect (not edit warring). I am simply leaving the page in an informative state. Discussion pages are deprecated anyway aren't they?
RobertJasiek: The "clear reasons" have not been stated in detail; they are unclear to me. If you respect his advantages, then also respect mine. Otherwise you are not being informative but desinformative by hiding some arbitrarily. Even if you want to be informative, there is no need for stating an arbitrary list. Instead one can explain that things are being discussed, why, and which current consensus appears to shine through all the fog.
IanDavis: Whatever. The page is better with some information on it. Discuss in various formats for changes.