|time||29 minutes plus 10/30s|
The first round started at 16:00 UTC.
|1||Zen19S||W12R B14R W17R||W11R B15R||B13R W16R||7||18||18||Winner|
|2||AyaMC||B02R W04R B07R||W13R B16R||B11R W15R||4||27||6|
|3||gnugo3pt8||B01R W05R||B03R W06R||W125½ B14R W17R||3||22||0|
|4||MCark||W03R B06R||W01R B05R||B025½ W04R B07R||0||31||0|
Black won 6 games and White won 8.
Three players registered. To make the numbers even and avoid byes, I included gnugo3pt8, running on a single processor.
Zen19S won all its games. AyaMC won all its games except those against Zen19S.
The crosstable above, and in particular the "Wins" column, is unfair to AyaMC. Zen19S, rated on KGS as 6d, plays better than AyaMC, rated at 3d. AyaMC plays much better than gnugo3pt8, rated as 7k. Gnugo3pt8 may be slightly better than the unrated MCark. Yet AyaMC has four wins, three behind Zen19S and only one ahead of gnugo3pt8.
This is a consequence of using a Swiss tournament with exactly four players and more than three rounds. The two strongest players play each other an above-average number of times, as do the two weakest. So the second-strongest gets a lower number of wins than it "deserves", ant the thirrd-strongest a higher number.
So, if you ever run a four-player Swiss tournament, do not use the number of wins as a reliable way of allocating the second place.
Players receive points for the 2014 Annual KGS Bot Championship as follows: