WinTD Pairing Log

Example of How WinTD computes Pairings

Version 3 of WinTD provides some tools for the TD to verify or explain how pairings were done by the program. One of these tools is the pairing log file which records the natural pairings before any adjustments and the final pairings. A number of parameters affecting the consideration of the pairings are noted in the log file.

If you want the short course explanation, then immediately below is the minimum information you need to read the log file but very little explanation followed by an MCC example, the Round 2 pairing log file for the October 1998 event.

If you want to get into more detail on what's going on, after the MCC example you will find the Help file from WinTD which goes into much more depth with a fictitious example.

Round 2 Pairing Log

Go to the start of the Help file explanation.

The key for the fields are reprinted here so you don't have to go back to find it in the Help text.

On each line, there are three fields before the names:

1. The rating difference from natural pairings. Since these are natural pairings, these are all 0. A suffix of I means a top/bottom interchange.
2. Color problems. OK is none, EQ means an equalization failure, AL an alternation failure, 33 means three in a row.
3. Rating difference flags. OK means within all limits, LO means over the low limit (but not high limit) and HI means over the high limit.

Each line will always list the higher ranked player on the left (once pairings have been set, what color you get is determined by the Color Allocation Rules). In parentheses is much of the relevant information for pairing: the current ranking (based upon score and rating), rating, color needs (w,b=expects White(Black) for alternation, W,B=needs White (Black) for equalization, WW,BB=needs White (Black) to avoid three in a row, x = no color yet), followed by team and/or club codes if those pairing preferences are being used.

On any pairing which has more serious problems, a line follows indicating what they are. Berry vs Flax is a 0.5 drop, Decker vs Sandler is a duplicate of an earlier game, Levine-Rosic are teammates.

**************************************************
**************************************************

Pairing Section Open, Round 2, on Wed Oct 07 01:55:35 1998

Options Used:
High (Equalize) Limit=200
Low (Alternate) Limit=80
Teammate Pairings Avoided

**********Natural Pairings

****Score Group 1.0****
   0  EQ OK Curdo, John A(1:2295,W,) vs Kelly,Joseph(5:1869,W,)
   0  EQ OK Newman,Tim(2:2108,W,) vs Spector,Jason(6:1780,W,)
   0  EQ OK Epp,Edward(3:2082,B,) vs Eldridge, Larry(7:1728,B,Eldrdg)
   0  OK OK Huntington, Robert(4:1985,B,) vs Gellert,Jason(8:1544,W,)
****Score Group 0.0****
   0  EQ OK Slater, Derek C(9:2134,B,) vs Michael, William G(13:1783,B,)
   0  OK OK Chamberlain,John(10:2067,W,) vs Shtudiner,Alexand(14:1737,B,)
   0  OK OK Booker,Roland D(11:1826,B,) vs Alarie, Donna(15:1689,W,)
   0  OK OK Young, C. Stephen(12:1807,W,) vs Goodrich,Peter(16:1584,B,)

Total value 8.000000
0004 Wrong Equal
0000 Drops for 0.000000 from Points 0.000000

**********Final Pairings

****Score Group 1.0****
   0  EQ OK Curdo, John A(1:2295,W,) vs Kelly,Joseph(5:1869,W,)
  26  OK OK Newman,Tim(2:2108,W,) vs Eldridge, Larry(7:1728,B,Eldrdg)
  26  OK OK Epp,Edward(3:2082,B,) vs Spector,Jason(6:1780,W,)
   0  OK OK Huntington, Robert(4:1985,B,) vs Gellert,Jason(8:1544,W,)
****Score Group 0.0****
   0  EQ OK Slater, Derek C(9:2134,B,) vs Michael, William G(13:1783,B,)
   0  OK OK Chamberlain,John(10:2067,W,) vs Shtudiner,Alexand(14:1737,B,)
   0  OK OK Booker,Roland D(11:1826,B,) vs Alarie, Donna(15:1689,W,)
   0  OK OK Young, C. Stephen(12:1807,W,) vs Goodrich,Peter(16:1584,B,)

Total value 4.000488
0002 Wrong Equal
0000 Drops for 0.000000 from Points 0.000000

**************************************************
**************************************************

Pairing Section U1800, Round 2, on Wed Oct 07 01:55:37 1998

Options Used:
High (Equalize) Limit=200
Low (Alternate) Limit=80
Teammate Pairings Avoided

**********Natural Pairings

****Score Group 1.0****
   0  EQ OK Penta, Jeff George(1:1712,B,) vs Schaefer,Alan(4:1450,B,)
   0  EQ OK Champion,Walt(2:1695,B,) vs Herman,Franklin B(5:1370,B,)
   0  OK OK Kaprielian,Mark(3:1573,W,) vs Azarian,Naira(6:nnnn,B,)
****Score Group 0.5****
   0  OK OK Beck,Alan(7:1640,W,) vs Barry,Michael(9:1602,x,)
   0  EQ OK Goldowsky, Howard(8:1640,B,) vs Ball,Barry(10:1304,B,GTE)
   0  EQ OK Niarhos, John(11:1293,W,) vs Mercurio,Philip(12:1704,W,)
    Drop 0.5 Points
****Score Group 0.0****
   0  EQ OK Almeida, James P(13:1425,W,) vs Rice,Alexander J(15:1348,W,)
   0  OK OK Ewer,Clark(14:1398,W,Ewer) vs Ewer,Charles(16:1287,B,Ewer)
    Teammate
   0        Millman, Jamie(17:1207,W,) Bye

Total value 466.666667
0001 Teammate
0005 Wrong Equal
0001 Drops for 0.500000 from Points 0.500000

**********Final Pairings

****Score Group 1.0****
   0  EQ OK Penta, Jeff George(1:1712,B,) vs Schaefer,Alan(4:1450,B,)
   0  EQ OK Champion,Walt(2:1695,B,) vs Herman,Franklin B(5:1370,B,)
   0  OK OK Kaprielian,Mark(3:1573,W,) vs Azarian,Naira(6:nnnn,B,)
****Score Group 0.5****
  38I OK OK Beck,Alan(7:1640,W,) vs Goldowsky, Howard(8:1640,B,)
   0I OK OK Barry,Michael(9:1602,x,) vs Niarhos, John(11:1293,W,)
  11  OK OK Ball,Barry(10:1304,B,GTE) vs Mercurio,Philip(12:1704,W,)
    Drop 0.5 Points
****Score Group 0.0****
  27  OK OK Almeida, James P(13:1425,W,) vs Ewer,Charles(16:1287,B,Ewer)
  27  EQ OK Ewer,Clark(14:1398,W,Ewer) vs Rice,Alexander J(15:1348,W,)
   0        Millman, Jamie(17:1207,W,) Bye

Total value 398.002894
0002 Interchange
0003 Wrong Equal
0001 Drops for 0.500000 from Points 0.500000

**************************************************
**************************************************

Pairing Section U1400, Round 2, on Wed Oct 07 01:55:40 1998

Options Used:
High (Equalize) Limit=200
Low (Alternate) Limit=80
Teammate Pairings Avoided

**********Natural Pairings

****Score Group 1.0****
   0  EQ OK Reed,Harvey(1:1379,B,) vs Briem,Guenther(3:1351,B,)
   0  EQ OK Powers,Tom(2:1356,W,) vs Isaacson,Randi(4:1224,W,)
   0  OK OK Chui,Travis(5:1038,x,MCC) vs Hodge, Alan(6:1142,W,)
    Drop 1.0 Points
****Score Group 0.0****
   0  EQ OK Valente,Joe(7:nnnn,B,) vs Karman,David(8:nnnn,B,)
  40        Karman,Stephen(9:nnnn,W,) Bye

Total value 854.400000
0003 Wrong Equal
0001 Drops for 1.000000 from Points 1.000000

**********Final Pairings

****Score Group 1.0****
  23  OK OK Reed,Harvey(1:1379,B,) vs Isaacson,Randi(4:1224,W,)
  23  OK OK Powers,Tom(2:1356,W,) vs Briem,Guenther(3:1351,B,)
  40  OK OK Chui,Travis(5:1038,x,MCC) vs Valente,Joe(7:nnnn,B,)
    Drop 1.0 Points    Drop/Raise Unrated
****Score Group 0.0****
   0I       Hodge, Alan(6:1142,W,) Bye
   0  OK OK Karman,David(8:nnnn,B,) vs Karman,Stephen(9:nnnn,W,)

Total value 784.404000
0001 Drop/Raise Unrated
0001 Interchange
0001 Drops for 1.000000 from Points 1.000000

Help file Explanation of the Pairing Log

Go to the MCC 9810 Round 2 Pairing Log

The WinTD pairing log can help you to answer the inevitable questions about why the pairings fell the way they did. Check the Log Pairing Logic box in the Pairing Rules section of the Preference Dialog. When you pair a round, information will be placed into a text window entitled PAIRLGxx.TXT (where xx are digits). If you leave this window open, subsequent pairing information will be added to the window. Note that it may not be easy to explain precisely why A was paired with B, since the answer to that is often that C can’t play D. It’s a bit easier to come up with (at least) some explanation of why A didn’t play C.

For each section, WinTD shows first the natural pairings, and then the final pairings.

**********Natural Pairings**********

****Score Group 3.0****
0 EQ OK Berry, Nicholas(1:988,W,OKTEV) vs Flax, Robert(2:1049,W,LNWEV)
Drop 0.5 Points

****Score Group 2.5****
0 OK OK Decker, Samuel(3:948,W,DWYEV) vs Sandler, Justin(4:888,B,LNCEV)
Duplicate
0 OK OK Carfang, Andrew(5:816,W,WLKSK) vs Banzhaf, Alex(6:1042,B,DWYEV)
Drop 0.5 Points Duplicate
****Score Group 2.0****
0 EQ OK Levine, Matt(7:913,BB,LNWEV) vs Rosic, Gregory Geo(9:883,B,LNWEV)
Teammate
0 OK OK Wright, Alrick K(8:885,W,LNWEV) vs Bialer, Jacob(10:852,B,ORREV)
****Score Group 1.5****
0 OK OK Burkhead, Shannon(11:808,b,DWYEV) vs Barzilai, Joshua(12:711,w,KNGEV)
Duplicate

On each line, there are three fields before the names:

1. The rating difference from natural pairings. Since these are natural pairings, these are all 0. A suffix of I means a top/bottom interchange.
2. Color problems. OK is none, EQ means an equalization failure, AL an alternation failure, 33 means three in a row.
3. Rating difference flags. OK means within all limits, LO means over the low limit (but not high limit) and HI means over the high limit.

Each line will always list the higher ranked player on the left (once pairings have been set, what color you get is determined by the Color Allocation Rules). In parentheses is much of the relevant information for pairing: the current ranking (based upon score and rating), rating, color needs (w,b=expects White(Black) for alternation, W,B=needs White (Black) for equalization, WW,BB=needs White (Black) to avoid three in a row, x = no color yet), followed by team and/or club codes if those pairing preferences are being used.

On any pairing which has more serious problems, a line follows indicating what they are. Berry vs Flax is a 0.5 drop, Decker vs Sandler is a duplicate of an earlier game, Levine-Rosic are teammates.

Following the pairings (we’ve omitted some of them) is a summary table

Total value 74690.285714
0003 Duplicate
0002 Teammate
0003 Wrong Equalize
0001 Three in a Row
0003 Drops for 2.000000 from Points 6.500000

There were some serious problems with the natural pairings, with three duplicates and two teammates out of eleven boards. The final pairings came out as follows:

**********Final Pairings**********

****Score Group 3.0****
101 EQ LO Berry, Nicholas(1:988,W,OKTEV) vs Decker, Samuel(3:948,W,DWYEV)
Drop 0.5 Points
****Score Group 2.5****
60 OK OK Flax, Robert(2:1049,W,LNWEV) vs Sandler, Justin(4:888,B,LNCEV)
129 OK LO Carfang, Andrew(5:816,W,WLKSK) vs Levine, Matt(7:913,BB,LNWEV)
Drop 0.5 Points
****Score Group 2.0****
2 EQ OK Banzhaf, Alex(6:1042,B,DWYEV) vs Rosic, Gregory Geo(9:883,B,LNWEV)
0 OK OK Wright, Alrick K(8:885,W,LNWEV) vs Bialer, Jacob(10:852,B,ORREV)
****Score Group 1.5****
344I OK HI Burkhead, Shannon(11:808,b,DWYEV) vs Berry, Tom(14:737,WW,KNGEV)
Drop 0.5 Points
0 AL OK Barzilai, Joshua(12:711,w,KNGEV) vs Burt, Alexander R(13:984,WW,LNWEV)
Drop 0.5 Points
****Score Group 1.0****
15 OK OK Siegfriedt, Gordon(15:705,B,LNWEV) vs Marshall, Andrew(17:607,WW,WLKSK)

64I OK OK Starkman, Nick I(16:641,BB,ORREV) vs Walls, Clifford(18:592,W,DWYEV)
46 OK OK Metz, Veronica(19:545,W,DWYEV) vs Fodor, Tim(21:693,BB,WLKSK)
Drop 1.0 Points
****Score Group 0.0****
14 EQ OK Johnson, Derrick E(20:739,B,LNWEV) vs Elyacharschuster, Isaac(22:679,B,WLKSK)

Total value 1127.119781
0002 Interchange
0003 Wrong Equalize
0001 Wrong Alternate
0001 Over High Limit
0002 Over Low Limit
0005 Drops for 3.000000 from Points 9.500000

In order to get pairings which avoid duplicates and teammates, it was necessary to do a multiple drop from the 1.5 score group. Let’s look closely at that score group:

****Score Group 1.5****
344I OK HI Burkhead, Shannon(11:808,b,DWYEV) vs Berry, Tom(14:737,WW,KNGEV)
Drop 0.5 Points
0 AL OK Barzilai, Joshua(12:711,w,KNGEV) vs Burt, Alexander R(13:984,WW,LNWEV)
Drop 0.5 Points

Why didn’t Burkhead and Barzilai (the two 1.5's) play? Here, the answer is easy: if you check the natural pairings above, that duplicates an earlier pairing. The “cheapest” way to handle this would be to have Burkhead play the highest player in the next score group (Burt) and Barzilai the next (Berry). However, Barzilai and Berry are teammates, so those pairings are switched. The 344 point rating gap on Burkhead-Berry is 984-737 (gap in the lower group) + 808-711 (gap in the higher group). While this is a large gap, the only alternative is to pair teammates.

Let’s now try to answer the more interesting question of why the lone 3.0 (Nicholas Berry) doesn’t play the highest ranking 2.5 (Robert Flax). You could work through the pairings manually to answer this question, but then why did you buy a pairing program? Instead, put WinTD to work. Here's how you could answer this question. The following is not for the faint of heart, and isn’t recommended for anyone who is just getting used to the program.

Make a Game Window for the paired section. Use Drag and Drop to alter the pairings to include the hypothetical matchup. (Don’t worry if it complains about a duplicate on the other board involved - we’re going to delete that anyway. Of course, if it warns you that the players you’re trying to force pair have played, you already have your answer). Delete all games except the one that you are checking. (Select by some means and use Edit-Clear). Pair the round again, but make sure that you change the round number back. WinTD will now pair the round again, but this time will make sure that the pairing you kept isn’t changed.

The pairing log will tell you the story:

**********Final Pairings**********

****Score Group 3.0****
0 EQ OK Berry, Nicholas(1:988,W,OKTEV) vs Flax, Robert(2:1049,W,LNWEV)
Drop 0.5 Points
****Score Group 2.5****
261I OK HI Decker, Samuel(3:948,W,DWYEV) vs Levine, Matt(7:913,BB,LNWEV)
Drop 0.5 Points
0I OK OK Sandler, Justin(4:888,B,LNCEV) vs Carfang, Andrew(5:816,W,WLKSK)
****Score Group 2.0****
2 EQ OK Banzhaf, Alex(6:1042,B,DWYEV) vs Rosic, Gregory Geo(9:883,B,LNWEV)
0 OK OK Wright, Alrick K(8:885,W,LNWEV) vs Bialer, Jacob(10:852,B,ORREV)

Remaining pairings are the same as before. WinTD avoids this pairing because rather than splitting the changes rather equally among the three pairings in the top two groups, it loads them onto a single pairing, where Decker drops over two players in his score group and the top player in the next one. If, as we hope, you decide that the original pairings were more reasonable, just use Undo until you get back to those pairings and move on. If you like the new ones better, they’re the ones on the computer right now.