Talk:Norway Chess

Chess Mid‑importance

	Chess portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chess, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chess on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChessWikipedia:WikiProject ChessTemplate:WikiProject Chesschess articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Norway

	Norway portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norway, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Norway on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NorwayWikipedia:WikiProject NorwayTemplate:WikiProject NorwayNorway articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Confusing table

After some headscratching I've decided that in the table, ½ in black (resp. white) means drawn Armageddon playing black (resp. white) and scores 1 (resp. 0) points. There are some problems:

The format is counter-intuitive. The source [1] conveys most of the same information more intuitively.
The extra information (distinguishing a black Armageddon win from a black Armageddon draw)
1. is not in the cited sources
2. could be conveyed by e.g. 1.5 for black Armageddon win versus 1.5* for black Armageddon draw (with a footnote explaining the asterisk)
Why go to the trouble of specifying the colour in the Armageddon game but not the colour in the classical game?

jnestorius^(talk)

Almost all of the 2019 individual match-up colors were flipped, which is incorrect as the colors. In each match-up, the colors are not re-drawn or altered in any other fashion when moving from Classical to Armageddon, i.e. Caruana–Carlsen in Round 9 was a Classical draw, while the same Caruana–Carlsen Armageddon, Caruana (White) won. I have corrected the 2019 table while reflecting the colors in each match-up. CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 21:35, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing tiebreakers 2023

After some headscratching and research online, it seems to be significantly difficult to pinpoint the tiebreak results of the blitz portion in 2023. According to chess.com's event page, the tiebreakers are as follows:

Direct Encounter
Sonneborn-Berger
Koya System
The Koya System Extended
Drawing of lots

It seems the person who created the 2023 section simply copied over the 2022 section, with the old tiebreakers which are no longer valid.

Under these tie breakers, Hikaru should be 6th, Fabiano should be 4th, Aaryan should be 9th, and Gukesh should be 10th. This is reflected in that page's results tab, yet many sources see other results. The chess.com stream over the event showed what the tiebreakers would dictate, EXCEPT switched Aaryan and Gukesh in the placement. I believe that to be an error, so I am submitting a change to match the chess.com events page. In that same article they show the tiebreaks for classical, which also do not match up with what is shown in the current table. Fraday (talk) 05:50, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]