There is no need to toss any coins in a Quad in the last round if the players are arrayed differently from rating order.
At one time long ago in the history of the galaxy, it was customary in Swiss System events to give the choice of color to the players in some games in the last round if they had similar pairing histories in an event. Then we TDs were not to do that anymore because there were new rules/customs that required you to assign color based on rank or rating order. That caused some consternation among the proles as they were used to having a choice sometimes. Then the proles adapted and forgot they ever had a choice. When the new pairing program overlords appeared, pairing were done by system. Pairing cards became anathema and were put away or shredded. The robots ruled, but much tinkering went on behind the scenes as rules were changed, old forms altered, and anarchists devised their own programs and forms. The pairing tables for Quads, for example changed, permitting a TD to put the players in rating order because the pairings on the new forms and the ever changing Rulebook pitted 1 vs. 2 in the last round. Thus it was written and it was expected to be done. However, some of the anarchists still randomize player placement in the Quads because they know nobody notices or cares about this very much. Sometimes, especially if they are particularly rebellious and use pairing cards, they may allow a few of the players in the last round of a Swiss System event a choice of color by placing an asterisk by the player names on the pairing sheet. The robots might scream “Heresy, heresy!” but since the robots are not yet fully control of the universe, when the rating reports and fees are processed, no one sees the asterisks, cards, or paper pairing sheets which are quietly burned by ritual so that the robots are blind and powerless.
It’s a generational thing combined with a big vs. small tournament thing.
Those of us who started to play and direct before pairing programs came along, especially at smaller Swisses and quads, got used to things like toss for colors and one of the board-one players getting to choose before round one.
Even then, things like that did not happen in CCA tournaments or larger events like the US Open, etc. In those events, the TD did the “toss” before the first round without involving the board-one players.
But here’s the thing: Today some TDs use pairing software for every event they direct, no matter how small. They let the pairing program choose colors for round one and from what I am reading here, perhaps they do the same in the last round of quads.
An example is the last round of a five-round Swiss when pairing players with identical scores and color history. Back in the day you would see “Toss for Colors” in large letters on the pairing sheet.
Today, some TDs will reject any form of “toss” and dig as deep into the pairing rules sub-sections as needed to find who ‘should’ have White. Even if the TD chooses to make it a “toss” game, he is likely to have the pairing program choose colors at random. The players might not even know their colors were determined by a toss.
I guess the conceptual struggle for by-the-book TDs born in the 1970s or later who run events with software-generated pairings (and prizes big enough to expect player complaints) is that a toss for colors is not “completely deterministic,” which we hear touted as the ideal.
Aye, tis true. But sometimes there is no fairer way to pair. Seems natural to players and TDs who started to play and direct in the '80s or earlier, especially at smaller events.
I will greatly enjoy the first over-50 section I play in, hopefully later this year.
In quads, one coin flip is sufficient for all the quads and all the rounds, using the tables. Heads, pair each quad in rating order. Tails, pair each quad in reverse rating order. For color purposes, that’s as much randomization as is needed.
Also, that way the top two players in each quad will always meet in the last round. Either the top two would be #1 and #2, or they would be #3 and #4, depending on the original toss.