Single Comment

Since Sam Trenholme has quit, the math will not work out for assigning
everyone to all games in each round unless something changes. Here are some
possibilities:

1) Someone else replaces Sam in the tournament, playing what would have
been his games.

2) Someone else quits the tournament.

3) Players already in the tournament play extra games, so that everyone
remaining in the tournament gets to play at least three games each round.

4) Sam rejoins the tournament.

If none of these happen, then three players will play only two games in
each subsequent round. This would be shared among the players as much as
possible, but with a loss of twelve games, and only nine players to
distribute the loss among, some would lose out on playing two games.

I am also considering dropping Modern Carrera's Chess from the tournament,
because this was Sam's choice for the tournament, and he has reneged on
the terms for including his choice in the tournament. This opens up a few
possibilities:

1) Allow a new player to join the tournament and pick a replacement for the
remainder of the tournament.

2) Let someone in the tournament who has not already chosen one of the
games in the tournament take on Modern Carrera's Chess as his official
choice.

3) Let someone in the tournament who has not already chosen one of the
games pick a new one.

4) Just drop Modern Carrera's Chess from the tournament.

Assuming Sam doesn't rejoin, which would remove all problems here, I favor
replacing him with a new player, and I would consider offering the
incentive of letting the new player pick a replacement for the remainder of
the tournament. But I would prefer to keep the games the same. So if
someone who hasn't picked a game would like to make Modern Carrera's
Chess his official choice, and if a new player joined without picking a
replacement game, that would probably work best.

Assuming we don't get a new player, then having each player play one or
two extra games during the course of the tournament would be the next best
option. But this would require the willing participation of everyone.

Short of getting everyone's participation in this, we could do it like
this. Those who are willing to play in place of Sam in a game someone would
have played against him will get priority in getting an alternate opponent
for the game he would have played against Sam. Those who are not willing to
play extra games may miss out on playing all their games.

Or we could do it like this. Anyone who replaces Sam in a game gets the opportunity to raise his score in the tournament, but to keep things fair, this opportunity would be given only to someone who has already lost the game in question. That way, no one could win any game more than three times.