Scoring in National Tournaments

[Gene Lindsay]

I received a letter from Richard Beckwith this week concerning th scoring in our National Tournaments. It also contained a form to be returned to him where we were to mark our preferences in order of which scoring system we preferred. On the 3-move section it only gave 3 options instead of 4 like the GAYP. The 2 game round scoring by game was not an option. I think everyone knows I think the 4 game round, winner take all scoring system is the best system to determine the best player, but if we change our scoring system I think we should adopt the scoring system used by the rest of the world, which is 2 game rounds scoring by game. To change it to anything else does not make any sense to me. We are the only country not using this format and I think one day we should probably adopt this scoring system to make the scoring system in checkers the same all over the world. For the time being though I prefer to stay with the scoring system we have used for years.
Just my thouhts on the matter, what do you think?

[Alex_Moiseyev]

For the time being though I prefer to stay with the scoring system we have used for years.

Me2

The main idea of any system - proper ranking players. I don't see any obvious evidents that existing system fails to do this. If we look at final standings in the past - we don't see too many unusual surprises. Strong players usually come on top. When their level drop - their results also eventually drop. If someone seriously improve and jumps to another level - results immediately reflect progress.

If we can't improve seriously existing system, and if there is nothing really wrong with existing system - there is no reason "to touch" things. My position on this matter is conservative.

Marion Tinsley was in favor of existing system. I am on the same page with Marion regards this matter. Existing system forces people to play with strongest opponents and win, I like this principle.

Alex Moiseyev