Swiss tournaments are on Lichess

@odoaker2015 #207 The case pointed out in #191 by @Pdpgrgn is a bit different. First of all, the 7th player played no games, so there were in fact 6 players. Accidentally, in the first three rounds players A, B, C ended up all playing players D, E, F. That's possible because of the specific results. Now the problem is that the pairings in round 4 couldn't be made. E.g. A vs C & D vs F is possible, but B can't play E again. Etc. Otherwise there would have been a round 4.

Tournament in case: lichess.org/swiss/UFyKy5jN

Of course I totally agree with #212 below.

At this stage it is just fantastic that we have a Swiss option the finer niceties can be sorted later - lets just enjoy for the moment.

In real life if for the number of Rounds you have too many entries or too few entries for a Swiss tournament you are running it is a problem. Either you have multiple players with max scores or you cannot pair a round without the same players playing each other again. If it is the same on Lichess for a while then so be it. Relax.

Many of us have played in Swisses where the pairings have not been run to FIDE rules but have survived the experience.

#210 + 2x countdown for first move

@TacticalBert Okay, that's possible! I didn't watch the tournament. But it remains the statement of the post #190

@TacticalBert You don't have to believe that, but then I advise you to do the same with a tourney management software of your choice. Try different numbers of Rounds with different numbers of participants. The good thing about such experiments is that they are repeatable! Or take the same parameters as #190

@CrowChess agree - this is great and nuances can be sorted out later - one of these being "too many entries":
I think this is dealt with quite nicely with "accelerated pairings" (i.e. make top players play each other sooner instead of beating up weaker players for first few rounds) - this, along with round counts appropriate for numbers of players should work. [Maybe the setting should be "Maximum number of rounds" instead of "Number of rounds" and the system decides on the actual number based on number of entries and how many rounds would be needed for a clear winner... it does that already for too few players, just doesn't adjust for 'too many']

how i wish there is a last man standing tomouant

@odoaker2015 I already did. I've put it in Swiss, FIDE mode and the Dutch variant just like Lichess implemented. 10 players were registered with descending ratings. As for the results, I chose to let the stronger player win every time. I was able to make nine rounds, after which of course no unique pairing can be made with ten players. So there you go, it's possible.

@TacticalBert
But it is not always the stronger player who wins. This is unrealistic. Maybe it might work in exceptional cases. But as a rule, it doesn't work. As #190 says! Maybe that's the way to trick the system. Try the same parameters as in #190! Let's see if it works again!

@TacticalBert And one more thing: the software must be set according to the guidelines of FIDE!