Feature Request: Implement Scheveningen Pairings for Team Tournaments

SommyB_med

HOW WOULD IT WORK?
Consider a match between Team A and Team B, with four players on each team.
Each player on Team A would face all four players on Team B. This would produce four rounds, with four games per round, for a total of 16 games.
For example:
Round 1: A1 vs B1, A2 vs B2, A3 vs B3, A4 vs B4.
Round 2: A1 vs B2, A2 vs B3, A3 vs B4, A4 vs B1.
Round 3: A1 vs B3, A2 vs B4, A3 vs B1, A4 vs B2.
Round 4: A1 vs B4, A2 vs B1, A3 vs B2, A4 vs B3.
The pairing order could vary, provided every player faces every opponent on the opposing team exactly once.
The final team score would be calculated by adding the points earned in all games.

WHY WOULD THIS BENEFIT LICHESS?

Better team competitions
The format would allow teams to compete through a complete series of individual encounters rather than relying on a single game between each pair of players.
Opportunities for schools, universities, and chess clubs
Organisers could use the system for inter-university competitions, school championships, club challenges, friendly matches, and team training sessions.
Greater participation
Every player contributes to the collective result. This makes the format attractive to communities that want to involve several members in a structured team competition.
More tournament variety
Adding Scheveningen would expand the available options beyond existing formats, giving organisers greater flexibility when designing competitions.
Opportunities for competitive development
Players would face multiple opponents from the opposing team, making the format useful for evaluating team strength and providing varied competitive experience.

SUGGESTED IMPLEMENTATION
I propose adding a dedicated Scheveningen Team Match option to Lichess.
Ideally, organisers would be able to:
Select the two participating teams and their players.
Set the time control and other standard game settings.
Generate pairings automatically across the required rounds.
Display individual results alongside the aggregate team score.
Optionally organise a double Scheveningen match, with colours reversed in the second cycle.
The implementation details could be determined by the Lichess development team, taking existing infrastructure and maintenance requirements into account.

CONCLUSION
Scheveningen is a recognised chess competition format that could make Lichess more versatile for team-based events.
Its introduction would provide additional opportunities for schools, universities, clubs, and online chess communities to organise structured competitions in which every player contributes to the team's performance.

I would welcome feedback from the community on the usefulness, feasibility, and potential implementation of this feature.

Would you support the introduction of native Scheveningen pairing functionality on Lichess?

INTRODUCTION I would like to propose the introduction of the Scheveningen pairing system as a native tournament format on Lichess. Scheveningen is a well-established chess format in which every player on one team plays against every player on the opposing team. The overall result is determined by the aggregate scores of the two teams. Although Lichess offers several tournament formats, native support for Scheveningen-style team matches would provide another useful option for clubs, schools, universities, and other chess communities. HOW WOULD IT WORK? Consider a match between Team A and Team B, with four players on each team. Each player on Team A would face all four players on Team B. This would produce four rounds, with four games per round, for a total of 16 games. For example: Round 1: A1 vs B1, A2 vs B2, A3 vs B3, A4 vs B4. Round 2: A1 vs B2, A2 vs B3, A3 vs B4, A4 vs B1. Round 3: A1 vs B3, A2 vs B4, A3 vs B1, A4 vs B2. Round 4: A1 vs B4, A2 vs B1, A3 vs B2, A4 vs B3. The pairing order could vary, provided every player faces every opponent on the opposing team exactly once. The final team score would be calculated by adding the points earned in all games. WHY WOULD THIS BENEFIT LICHESS? 1. Better team competitions The format would allow teams to compete through a complete series of individual encounters rather than relying on a single game between each pair of players. 2. Opportunities for schools, universities, and chess clubs Organisers could use the system for inter-university competitions, school championships, club challenges, friendly matches, and team training sessions. 3. Greater participation Every player contributes to the collective result. This makes the format attractive to communities that want to involve several members in a structured team competition. 4. More tournament variety Adding Scheveningen would expand the available options beyond existing formats, giving organisers greater flexibility when designing competitions. 5. Opportunities for competitive development Players would face multiple opponents from the opposing team, making the format useful for evaluating team strength and providing varied competitive experience. SUGGESTED IMPLEMENTATION I propose adding a dedicated Scheveningen Team Match option to Lichess. Ideally, organisers would be able to: Select the two participating teams and their players. Set the time control and other standard game settings. Generate pairings automatically across the required rounds. Display individual results alongside the aggregate team score. Optionally organise a double Scheveningen match, with colours reversed in the second cycle. The implementation details could be determined by the Lichess development team, taking existing infrastructure and maintenance requirements into account. CONCLUSION Scheveningen is a recognised chess competition format that could make Lichess more versatile for team-based events. Its introduction would provide additional opportunities for schools, universities, clubs, and online chess communities to organise structured competitions in which every player contributes to the team's performance. I would welcome feedback from the community on the usefulness, feasibility, and potential implementation of this feature. Would you support the introduction of native Scheveningen pairing functionality on Lichess?

Royals_Fan22

@SommyB_med This is why there's no round-robin tournaments on lichess, and I think the same would go for scheveningen tournaments:

Can I play round-robin tournaments on Lichess?
We'd like to add it, but unfortunately Round Robin doesn't work online.
The reason is that it has no fair way of dealing with people leaving the tournament early. We cannot expect that all players will play all their games in an online event. It just won't happen, and as a result most Round Robin tournaments would be flawed and unfair, which defeats their very reason to exist.
The closest you can get to Round Robin online is to play a Swiss tournament with a very high number of rounds. Then all possible pairings will be played before the tournament ends.

https://lichess.org/swiss

@SommyB_med This is why there's no round-robin tournaments on lichess, and I think the same would go for scheveningen tournaments: >Can I play round-robin tournaments on Lichess? We'd like to add it, but unfortunately Round Robin doesn't work online. The reason is that it has no fair way of dealing with people leaving the tournament early. We cannot expect that all players will play all their games in an online event. It just won't happen, and as a result most Round Robin tournaments would be flawed and unfair, which defeats their very reason to exist. The closest you can get to Round Robin online is to play a Swiss tournament with a very high number of rounds. Then all possible pairings will be played before the tournament ends. https://lichess.org/swiss

SommyB_med

@Royals_Fan22 said ^

https://lichess.org/swiss

Thank you for the response. I understand the concern regarding early withdrawals and the potential unfairness they can introduce into online tournaments. However, I believe the challenges associated with withdrawals deserve further examination rather than serving as a reason to rule out the Scheveningen system entirely.
First, withdrawal-related issues are not exclusive to round-robin tournaments. Swiss tournaments also have to account for players who withdraw or fail to complete all rounds. While the implications may differ between formats, this suggests that the underlying issue is not necessarily insurmountable; rather, it is a question of how each format handles incomplete participation.

Second, the Scheveningen system serves a distinct competitive purpose. It allows two teams to compete against each other through individual games, with each player facing members of the opposing team. This creates opportunities for structured team competitions that conventional Swiss tournaments do not necessarily replicate in the same way. For communities interested in this format, a Swiss tournament with many rounds is not always an equivalent substitute.

Third, there may be ways to mitigate the problem. For example, predefined withdrawal rules, appropriate handling of unplayed games, or restrictions on tournament eligibility could be explored. I recognise that these measures would require careful consideration to avoid creating new fairness issues, but they could form the basis of a technical discussion rather than an immediate dismissal.

Perhaps Lichess could consider a limited implementation or experimental version, allowing tournament organisers to test the format and provide feedback on its practical challenges before any wider rollout.

I appreciate that development resources are limited and that maintaining competitive integrity is essential. My suggestion is simply that the feasibility of the Scheveningen system be evaluated on its own merits, taking into account both its potential challenges and the distinct value it could offer to team tournament organisers.

Would the developers be open to discussing the specific technical obstacles that would need to be addressed for such a feature to become feasible?

Thank you for your time and consideration

@Royals_Fan22 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/qSuVhjfs) > https://lichess.org/swiss Thank you for the response. I understand the concern regarding early withdrawals and the potential unfairness they can introduce into online tournaments. However, I believe the challenges associated with withdrawals deserve further examination rather than serving as a reason to rule out the Scheveningen system entirely. First, withdrawal-related issues are not exclusive to round-robin tournaments. Swiss tournaments also have to account for players who withdraw or fail to complete all rounds. While the implications may differ between formats, this suggests that the underlying issue is not necessarily insurmountable; rather, it is a question of how each format handles incomplete participation. Second, the Scheveningen system serves a distinct competitive purpose. It allows two teams to compete against each other through individual games, with each player facing members of the opposing team. This creates opportunities for structured team competitions that conventional Swiss tournaments do not necessarily replicate in the same way. For communities interested in this format, a Swiss tournament with many rounds is not always an equivalent substitute. Third, there may be ways to mitigate the problem. For example, predefined withdrawal rules, appropriate handling of unplayed games, or restrictions on tournament eligibility could be explored. I recognise that these measures would require careful consideration to avoid creating new fairness issues, but they could form the basis of a technical discussion rather than an immediate dismissal. Perhaps Lichess could consider a limited implementation or experimental version, allowing tournament organisers to test the format and provide feedback on its practical challenges before any wider rollout. I appreciate that development resources are limited and that maintaining competitive integrity is essential. My suggestion is simply that the feasibility of the Scheveningen system be evaluated on its own merits, taking into account both its potential challenges and the distinct value it could offer to team tournament organisers. Would the developers be open to discussing the specific technical obstacles that would need to be addressed for such a feature to become feasible? Thank you for your time and consideration

Royals_Fan22

edited

Round 1: A1 vs B1, A2 vs B2, A3 vs B3, A4 vs B4.
Round 2: A1 vs B2, A2 vs B3, A3 vs B4, A4 vs B1.
Round 3: A1 vs B3, A2 vs B4, A3 vs B1, A4 vs B2.
Round 4: A1 vs B4, A2 vs B1, A3 vs B2, A4 vs B3.

Consider player A2, for example, just doesn't play rounds 2,3,4. What happens now? B3, B4, B1 don't have an opponent in one of their rounds. Now, maybe, player B4 doesn't play the last round. A1 has no opponent. In a Scheveningen -style tournament online, there's just no effective way to deal with players leaving. Don't know what further examination is required.

@SommyB_med A few problems: First, teams need to be the same size, so if one team doesn't get enough participants or there are lots that want to play, there will be a issue there. Also, consider a tournament as you described with 4 boards: >Round 1: A1 vs B1, A2 vs B2, A3 vs B3, A4 vs B4. Round 2: A1 vs B2, A2 vs B3, A3 vs B4, A4 vs B1. Round 3: A1 vs B3, A2 vs B4, A3 vs B1, A4 vs B2. Round 4: A1 vs B4, A2 vs B1, A3 vs B2, A4 vs B3. Consider player A2, for example, just doesn't play rounds 2,3,4. What happens now? B3, B4, B1 don't have an opponent in one of their rounds. Now, maybe, player B4 doesn't play the last round. A1 has no opponent. In a Scheveningen -style tournament online, there's just no effective way to deal with players leaving. Don't know what further examination is required.