In chess tournaments, tiebreaks are used to determine the final standings when players have the same score. Tiebreaks help rank these players to determine final positions, awards, and prizes.

The WSCF follows the US Chess Federation’s recommended tie-break methods and order of use, which is:

1. Modified Median (MMed) Tiebreak Method

In chess tournaments where each player competes in 5 games against different opponents, the Modified Median method refines tiebreak calculations by adjusting for the relevance of games based on the player’s overall performance. The method involves:

· Plus Score (more wins than losses): Discard the lowest opponent score.
· Minus Score (more losses than wins): Discard the highest opponent score.
· Even Score (equal number of wins and losses): Discard both the highest and lowest scores.

A “Plus Score” indicates a player who has a score above half the total possible points (e.g., more than 2.5 in 5 rounds), a “Minus Score” is below half the total possible points, and an “Even Score” is exactly half the total possible points. These distinctions help to adjust each player’s tiebreak score by focusing on their more significant matches, thereby offering a fair and detailed reflection of their tournament performance.

Example:
Consider two players, Erin and Bob, each finishing with 3.0 out of 5.0 points:
· Erin’s Opponents’ Scores: 0, 3, 3, 4, 5
· Bob’s Opponents’ Scores: 3, 2, 5, 3, 3

Modified Median Calculation:
· Erin (with plus score of 3.0/5.0) discards the lowest score (0), resulting in 3 + 3 + 4 + 5 = 15.
· Bob (also with plus score of 3.0/5.0) discards the lowest score (2), resulting in 3 + 5 + 3 + 3 = 14.

Erin ranks higher than Bob using the Modified Median method because her adjusted score of remaining opponents is higher. This indicates a stronger performance against more competitive opponents and reflects her consistent ability to outperform in tougher matches throughout the tournament. This method ensures rankings accurately represent each player’s strength and consistency across the tournament.

2. Solkoff Tiebreak Method

In chess tournaments where each player competes in 5 games against different opponents, the Solkoff method serves as an additional tiebreak measure following the Modified Median. It is employed when players remain tied after the initial tiebreak calculation.

The Solkoff score is the sum of the total points scored by all opponents a player has faced throughout the tournament. A higher Solkoff score suggests that a player has competed against tougher opposition, providing a secondary basis for breaking ties. This score evaluates the overall challenge faced by a player by summing up the tournament scores of their opponents, offering insight into the strength of the field they contended against.

Example:
Imagine two players, Erin and Bob, are tied after applying the Modified Median method. Here are their opponents’ total scores in the tournament:
· Erin’s Opponents’ Scores: 0, 3, 3, 4, 5
· Bob’s Opponents’ Scores: 3, 2, 5, 3, 3

Solkoff Calculation:
· Erin’s Solkoff Score: 0 + 3 + 3 + 4 + 5 = 15
· Bob’s Solkoff Score: 3 + 2 + 5 + 3 + 3 = 16

In this scenario, Bob ranks higher than Erin using the Solkoff method because his opponents’ combined tournament points total is higher. This indicates that Bob faced a more challenging set of opponents than Erin, justifying his higher placement when the Modified Median could not resolve the tie.

This structured approach ensures that even in closely matched tournaments, the depth of competition each player faces is thoroughly considered, offering a clear and fair method to determine rankings beyond initial tiebreakers.

3. Sonneborn-Berger (SB) Tiebreak Method

The Sonneborn-Berger score, often just called the SB score, is used in chess tournaments when players are still tied after using both the Modified Median and Solkoff methods. This method assesses the impact of each player’s wins and draws, emphasizing the quality of opponents against whom these results were achieved.

SB Score Calculation:
Wins: Add the total tournament points of all the opponents a player has defeated
Draws: Add half the total tournament points of all the opponents with whom the player has drawn
Losses: Points from opponents who defeated the player are NOT included in the calculation

This scoring method rewards players for securing results against higher-performing opponents, making it a measure of both the player’s strength and the competitive nature of their matches.

Example:
Let’s continue with Erin and Bob, who remain tied after the Solkoff score:
· Erin’s Game Results: Wins against opponents who scored 0, 3, and 4 points; draws with an opponent who scored 3 points; and loses to an opponent who scored 5 points
· Bob’s Game Results: Wins against opponents who scored 3 and 5 points; draws with opponents who scored 2 and 3 points; and loses to an opponent who scored 3 points.

SB Calculation:
Erin’s SB Score = 7 + 1.5 = 8.5
Wins: 0+ 3 + 4 = 7
Draws: 0.5 x 3 = 1.5 (i.e., half of 3)

Bob’s SB Score = 8+ 2.5 = 10.5
Wins: 3 + 5 = 8
Draws: 0.5 x (2 + 3) = 2.5 (i.e., half of 5)

In this scenario, Bob ranks higher than Erin using the Sonneborn-Berger method because his SB score of 10.5 is greater than Erin’s 8.5. This indicates that Bob not only faced strong opponents but also secured crucial points against them, which gives him an edge in the final tiebreaking consideration.

This method ensures a thorough assessment of each player’s performance, factoring in both the strength of the opponents and the player’s results against them, providing a comprehensive measure to resolve ties in tightly contested tournaments.

4. Cumulative Score Tiebreak Method

When ties persist through the Modified Median, Solkoff, and Sonneborn-Berger methods, the Cumulative score method is employed as the next tiebreaker in chess tournaments. This method evaluates a player’s performance over the course of the tournament by tallying their scores after each round, creating a running total of a player’s points.

The Cumulative Score method not only considers the points gathered in each round but also the progression of a player’s performance, giving insight into how consistently they scored and how they peaked at crucial stages of the tournament.

Example:
Continuing with Erin and Bob, let’s assume they remain tied after the SB score:
· Erin’s Round-by-Round Scores: Win (1), Win (1), Draw (0.5), Loss (0), Win (1)
· Bob’s Round-by-Round Scores: Win (1), Loss (0), Win (1), Draw (0.5), Draw (0.5)

Cumulative Score Calculation:
· Erin’s Cumulative Scores: 1 (after R1), 2 (after R2), 2.5 (after R3), 2.5 (after R4), 3.5 (after R5)
· Bob’s Cumulative Scores: 1 (after R1), 1 (after R2), 2 (after R3), 2.5 (after R4), 3 (after R5)

Final Cumulative Scores:
· Erin: 1 + 2 + 2.5 + 2.5 + 3.5 = 11.5
· Bob: 1 + 1 + 2 + 2.5 + 3 = 9.5

In this final tiebreak, Erin ranks higher than Bob with a total cumulative score of 11.5 compared to Bob’s 9.5. Erin’s early victories contributed significantly, allowing her to amass a higher running total earlier in the tournament, which gives her the advantage in the final tiebreaking method.

This method rewards consistent scoring and early successes, providing a clear and definitive resolution to ties after multiple tiebreaker layers, ensuring a comprehensive and fair assessment of each player’s performance throughout the tournament.

For more detailed information about the above tiebreaks provided by our tournament software producers WinTD – please click here.