Auto withdraw for tourny rating problems.

Looking at the tournament forums, I find that it is not uncommon for someone to enter a low rating tournament, when they are obviously better than the restrictions. So I have an idea to make it so that anyone who is outside the restrictions by a certain amount(say, 100 rating points) is withdrawn from that tournament without suffering any losses. This could happen with each round update, and it would make it much more fair for the people that the tournament is intended for.

-Fatty

Originally posted by Fat mans revenge
Looking at the tournament forums, I find that it is not uncommon for someone to enter a low rating tournament, when they are obviously better than the restrictions. So I have an idea to make it so that anyone who is outside the restrictions by a certain amount(say, 100 rating points) is withdrawn from that tournament without suffering any losses. ...[text shortened]... nd it would make it much more fair for the people that the tournament is intended for.

-Fatty

100 rating points is a drop in the ocean. It wouldnt work anyway since say someone has 150 games and they have a constant 1300 rating and then they drop that number of games to 20 and there rating goes to 1600 its not fair that they should be kicked out of a tournament they havent done anything wrong.

I joined a banded competion thats nearing the end now (1200-1399). When I joined I had a rating of 1350 ish and in the year since I joined RHP at that point it had never been over 1400. I am now 1550. The main reason being I won more games than I lost in the tourney! Joining a tournament is a good way to either lower you rating or raise it, depending on weather you do well or not.

Originally posted by Fat mans revenge
Looking at the tournament forums, I find that it is not uncommon for someone to enter a low rating tournament, when they are obviously better than the restrictions. So I have an idea to make it so that anyone who is outside the restrictions by a certain amount(say, 100 rating points) is withdrawn from that tournament without suffering any losses. ...[text shortened]... nd it would make it much more fair for the people that the tournament is intended for.

-Fatty

Sounds complicated. So you are in te middle of the final round and your rating goes up too much so you are kicked and automatically lose. Not a wise idea. I do understand though why something like that would be needed but thats just not the way to do it. I don't know how it could be done, thought about by averae rating but thats worthless for people who are usually low but when playing well are usually alot higher.

Perhaps with some modification this idea could be workable, for example, for banded tournaments, people often seem to sign up and then, even before the start, their rating is way up above the banding. I think that these people should be removed just prior to starting the tourny.

Maybe there should be a check to see how high a player's rating has been - not just the last 30 days. Maybe an overall average rating?
If this value is higher than the banded maximum the player might be allowed to join a higher rated banded tourney?

Originally posted by Crowley
Maybe there should be a check to see how high a player's rating has been - not just the last 30 days. Maybe an overall average rating?
If this value is higher than the banded maximum the player might be allowed to join a higher rated banded tourney?

How about using a rating floor (like the USCF does) when determining a player's eligibility to enter a banded tournament?

From http://math.bu.edu/people/mg/ratings/approx/approx.html

"Rating floors exist at 100, 1400, 1500, 1600, , 2100. No player's rating can drop below 100. A player's rating floor is calculated by subtracting 200 points from the highest attained established rating, and then using the floor just below. For example, if a player's highest rating was 1941, then subtracting 200 yields 1741, and the floor just below is 1700. Thus the player's rating cannot go below 1700. If a player's highest rating was 1588, then subtracting 200 yields 1388, and the next lowest floor is 100, which is this player's floor."

Sounds pretty good, but is the gap between 100 and 1400 not a bit too large, if I have understood correctly what you intend to say? I can image if your rating barely gets over 1000, you still might not have very much change against a 1300 player? I am a 1300 player, but cannot remember ever losing to someone with a rating near 1000, let alone under a 1000 in almost 500 games. Maybe 1100 or 1200 would be a better rating for the last floor?

Originally posted by Aiko
Maybe 1100 or 1200 would be a better rating for the last floor?

Agree. I'm not sure why USCF has that gap between 100 and 1400.

I like the ratings floor idea, that seems like a great idea. But perhaps adding in another floor or two would be a good idea.

And I see it has happened again. Checking the Rho banded 1100-1199, I find that there two people above the ratings requirement. Of course, not a large difference, but they should still be in the 1200-1299 tournament. And as well in the January banded duel, there is a player, maybe more, that recently went on a long absence spree, and is a 1400-1500 player that is playing in a 1000-1199 tournament. Just doesn't seem fair to me.

Edit:Looking through a couple more low level tournaments, I find that the same 1400-1500(fuzzyamp) player that entered the January banded duel has also entered into the Rho 1000-1099. He is already nearly 100 rating points above 1099. Seeing how this doesn't seem to be a few isolated incidents, I think something needs to be done to stop this.

-Fatty

Blobby has started a discussion about it here: http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=18679&page=1...