Answers.Body: <p>Unfortunately there's nothing you can do once the game is over, even if pairing rules were violated. In some tournaments you can talk to the TD after pairings are <em>posted</em>, but in FIDE tournaments pairings might be final once they are posted (if memory serves).</p>
  
  <p>In rare cases you could lodge an appeal with an appeal committee, but most tournaments don't have these.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-11-16T15:00:09.360Z
Answers.Text: In FIDE tournaments, published pairings *are* final in almost all cases. Specifically, [FIDE Handbook section C.04.2.D.10](https://handbook.fide.com/chapter/C0402) says: “Once published, the pairings shall not be changed unless they are found to violate C.04.1.b (*Two players shall not play against each other more than once*).”
Answers.UserDisplayName: Brian Drake
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-06-05T03:42:45.240Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2019-06-05T03:42:45.240Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Inertial Ignorance
Answers.Body: <blockquote>
    <p>Lodging an appeal also came to mind that time. However, can the result
    actually be changed?</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>No. Only in extreme cases such as cheating can the result be changed.</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>Or should the game be replayed?</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>No. There is no reason why the game should be replayed.</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>In addition, as I am not an arbiter, is there an option in Swiss
    Manager (the pairing program which was used to make the pairings) not
    to allow players get the same color 3 times continuously?</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>Swiss Manager uses the JaVaFo pairing engine written by FIDE. The pairing engine implements the FIDE defined pairing rules. As far as I know (I am a FIDE arbiter) the only pairing rule that can be overridden is the one which says that a player who has already had a voluntary bye can also be given a compulsory bye in a later round given an odd number of players. In my experience this is never done.</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p><strong>In the last round</strong>, I played with Black and my opponent with White.</p>
    
    <p>After the game, which I unfortunately lost, due to the lack of opening
    preparation, I realized that my opponent had taken White 3 times in
    the 3 last rounds. Playing with opposite colours was also impossible,
    since I had White 2 times continuously. In addition, I had played with
    most of the players which were up to the 10th position, so I couldn't
    find anyone else to play - maybe this is an exception?</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>In the FIDE Handbook the rules for Swiss pairing are given in the section <a href="https://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html?id=83&amp;view=article" rel="noreferrer">Basic rules for Swiss Systems</a>. </p>
  
  <p>Your case is covered by these two rules.</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p><strong>f</strong> For each player the difference between the number of black and the
    number of white games shall not be greater than 2 or less than –2.<br>
    <strong>Each system may have exceptions to this rule in the last round of a tournament</strong>.</p>
    
    <p><strong>g</strong> No player shall receive the same colour three times in a row.<br>
    <strong>Each system may have exceptions to this rule in the last round of a tournament</strong>.</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>In the last round of a tournament the requirement to allow the highest placed players to play each other in the interests of having clear winners and major places decided fairly takes precedence over most of the other rules. The rule which says that two players who have already played in an earlier round cannot be paired against each other again takes precedence over all other rules and cannot be broken.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-06-04T19:05:20.940Z
Answers.Text: So, even if this is defined in the tournament's announcement, it has exceptions? Or maybe it is always defined and therefore always has exceptions? As to what you added with your edit which was merged: "The rule which says that two players who have already played in an earlier round cannot be paired against each other again takes precedence over all other rules and cannot be broken" - I haven't seen it elsewhere - has it actually happened?
Answers.UserDisplayName: double-beep
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-06-04T19:12:56.223Z
Answers.Text: The tournament announcement was an incomplete quote from the FIDE Swiss pairing rules. A FIDE rated tournament must abide by those rules. Swiss Manager is an approved pairing program (approved by FIDE). It must implement those rules. No FIDE rated Swiss tournament has ever broken the rule regarding never playing the same opponent twice. Tie-break play-offs are obviously something else as are double round robins.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Brian Towers
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-06-05T08:19:55.663Z
Answers.Text: @double-beep: following the rules of the Swiss system yields the list of guarantees mentioned, **but** Swiss is only suitable if the number of players is sufficient for the number of rounds. If you had already played most of the players up to the 10th position, it sounds like there were too many rounds for the number of players (or too few players for the number of rounds) and then strange things can happen. The rules allow that though.
Answers.UserDisplayName: RemcoGerlich
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-12-21T04:14:30.267Z
Answers.Text: Seems like the cases that g bars is a subset of the cases that f bars.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Acccumulation
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2023-08-20T23:12:21.597Z
Answers.Text: @Acccumulation It is not a subset. For example, WWBBB would violate g but not f.
Answers.UserDisplayName: D M
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-06-04T18:58:09.093Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2019-06-04T18:58:09.093Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Brian Towers
Body: <p>A few months before an official national tournament is held, an announcement is published, which contains information about specific rules (e.g., no draw offers until the 30th move), etc. One thing that caught my attention was that a player <strong>can't have the same colour for 3 consecutive rounds</strong>.</p>
  <p>Yet, in the last round, I played Black and my opponent White. After the end of the game, I realize that my opponent had taken White 3 times in a row. Swapping colours was also impossible since I was Black in the last 2 rounds.</p>
  <p>Can the result actually be changed? Or should the game be replayed?</p>
  <p>As I am not an arbiter, I'd also like to ask whether there is an option in Swiss Manager (the pairing program used) not to allow players to get the same color 3 times in a row?</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-06-04T18:28:46.520Z
Comments.Text: Can you add a link to the tournament on chess-results? Otherwise it is very difficult to comment.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Brian Towers
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-06-04T18:35:41.477Z
Comments.Text: I prefer not to link it - if you want clarification ping me and I'll add a comment. [Here](https://i.sstatic.net/pYE9v.png) is a screenshot - let me know if you want more info about it.
Comments.UserDisplayName: double-beep
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-06-05T02:29:09.613Z
Comments.Text: Was "continuously" a typo for "consecutively"?
Comments.UserDisplayName: bof
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-12-31T23:49:37.000Z
Comments.Text: They should have informed you of the problem and had you two flip for white/black instead of assigning it.  Sometimes these things happen depending on the number of players and rounds.  Better planning earlier , perhaps smarter software, would have avoided this problem.
Comments.UserDisplayName: yobamamama
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2020-12-21T03:23:10.327Z
Comments.Text: @yobamamama Um, no. You don't flip for colors in the last round. Who gets what colors is defined by the rules. In this case, OP and their opponent had identical color histories, so OP got Black because they had the higher score and thus had their color preference granted. "Smarter software" would only help if FIDE changed their rules.
Comments.UserDisplayName: D M
Tags: <tournament>
Title: Is it acceptable to pair a player with the same colour three times in a row?
ThreadText: # Is it acceptable to pair a player with the same colour three times in a row?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2019-06-04)
  
  A few months before an official national tournament is held, an announcement is published, which contains information about specific rules (e.g., no draw offers until the 30th move), etc. One thing that caught my attention was that a player **can't have the same colour for 3 consecutive rounds**.
  
  Yet, in the last round, I played Black and my opponent White. After the end of the game, I realize that my opponent had taken White 3 times in a row. Swapping colours was also impossible since I was Black in the last 2 rounds.
  
  Can the result actually be changed? Or should the game be replayed?
  
  As I am not an arbiter, I'd also like to ask whether there is an option in Swiss Manager (the pairing program used) not to allow players to get the same color 3 times in a row?
  
  **Tags:** tournament
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: Can you add a link to the tournament on chess-results? Otherwise it is very difficult to comment.  
  > **username_0**: I prefer not to link it - if you want clarification ping me and I'll add a comment. [Here](https://i.sstatic.net/pYE9v.png) is a screenshot - let me know if you want more info about it.  
  > **username_2**: Was "continuously" a typo for "consecutively"?  
  > **username_3**: They should have informed you of the problem and had you two flip for white/black instead of assigning it.  Sometimes these things happen depending on the number of players and rounds.  Better planning earlier , perhaps smarter software, would have avoided this problem.  
  > **username_4**: @username_3 Um, no. You don't flip for colors in the last round. Who gets what colors is defined by the rules. In this case, OP and their opponent had identical color histories, so OP got Black because they had the higher score and thus had their color preference granted. "Smarter software" would only help if FIDE changed their rules.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 2 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_1 on 2019-06-04. Score: 9 | Accepted answer
  
  > Lodging an appeal also came to mind that time. However, can the result
  > actually be changed?
  
  No. Only in extreme cases such as cheating can the result be changed.
  
  > Or should the game be replayed?
  
  No. There is no reason why the game should be replayed.
  
  > In addition, as I am not an arbiter, is there an option in Swiss
  > Manager (the pairing program which was used to make the pairings) not
  > to allow players get the same color 3 times continuously?
  
  Swiss Manager uses the JaVaFo pairing engine written by FIDE. The pairing engine implements the FIDE defined pairing rules. As far as I know (I am a FIDE arbiter) the only pairing rule that can be overridden is the one which says that a player who has already had a voluntary bye can also be given a compulsory bye in a later round given an odd number of players. In my experience this is never done.
  
  > **In the last round**, I played with Black and my opponent with White.
  >
  > After the game, which I unfortunately lost, due to the lack of opening
  > preparation, I realized that my opponent had taken White 3 times in
  > the 3 last rounds. Playing with opposite colours was also impossible,
  > since I had White 2 times continuously. In addition, I had played with
  > most of the players which were up to the 10th position, so I couldn't
  > find anyone else to play - maybe this is an exception?
  
  In the FIDE Handbook the rules for Swiss pairing are given in the section [Basic rules for Swiss Systems](https://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html?id=83&view=article).
  
  Your case is covered by these two rules.
  
  > **f** For each player the difference between the number of black and the
  > number of white games shall not be greater than 2 or less than –2.  
  > **Each system may have exceptions to this rule in the last round of a tournament**.
  >
  > **g** No player shall receive the same colour three times in a row.  
  > **Each system may have exceptions to this rule in the last round of a tournament**.
  
  In the last round of a tournament the requirement to allow the highest placed players to play each other in the interests of having clear winners and major places decided fairly takes precedence over most of the other rules. The rule which says that two players who have already played in an earlier round cannot be paired against each other again takes precedence over all other rules and cannot be broken.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: So, even if this is defined in the tournament's announcement, it has exceptions? Or maybe it is always defined and therefore always has exceptions? As to what you added with your edit which was merged: "The rule which says that two players who have already played in an earlier round cannot be paired against each other again takes precedence over all other rules and cannot be broken" - I haven't seen it elsewhere - has it actually happened?  
  > **username_1**: The tournament announcement was an incomplete quote from the FIDE Swiss pairing rules. A FIDE rated tournament must abide by those rules. Swiss Manager is an approved pairing program (approved by FIDE). It must implement those rules. No FIDE rated Swiss tournament has ever broken the rule regarding never playing the same opponent twice. Tie-break play-offs are obviously something else as are double round robins.  
  > **username_7**: @username_0: following the rules of the Swiss system yields the list of guarantees mentioned, **but** Swiss is only suitable if the number of players is sufficient for the number of rounds. If you had already played most of the players up to the 10th position, it sounds like there were too many rounds for the number of players (or too few players for the number of rounds) and then strange things can happen. The rules allow that though.  
  > **username_8**: Seems like the cases that g bars is a subset of the cases that f bars.  
  > **username_4**: @username_8 It is not a subset. For example, WWBBB would violate g but not f.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_5 on 2019-06-05. Score: -1
  
  Unfortunately there's nothing you can do once the game is over, even if pairing rules were violated. In some tournaments you can talk to the TD after pairings are *posted*, but in FIDE tournaments pairings might be final once they are posted (if memory serves).
  
  In rare cases you could lodge an appeal with an appeal committee, but most tournaments don't have these.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_6**: In FIDE tournaments, published pairings *are* final in almost all cases. Specifically, [FIDE Handbook section C.04.2.D.10](https://handbook.fide.com/chapter/C0402) says: “Once published, the pairings shall not be changed unless they are found to violate C.04.1.b (*Two players shall not play against each other more than once*).”  
  
  ---
  
  