1. Joined
    25 Feb '16
    Moves
    3653
    02 Apr '16 14:46
    Why do not maintain tournaments of all type always open and, as they fill up, simply start them and open new ones of the same type? Why do people need to keep asking for this and that tournament?
  2. SubscriberKewpieonline
    since 1-Feb-07
    Joined
    20 Jan '09
    Moves
    316705
    09 Apr '16 05:05
    Originally posted by Metacomedian
    Why do not maintain tournaments of all type always open and, as they fill up, simply start them and open new ones of the same type? Why do people need to keep asking for this and that tournament?
    Not all types of tournament, but we could do with some standardised ones. Great idea!
  3. SubscriberRuss
    RHP Code Monkey
    RHP HQ
    Joined
    21 Feb '01
    Moves
    1795
    11 Apr '16 13:19
    Suggestions for a permanent list? If we can establish that, I'll get some scripts together to make sure, as a minimum, they are always available.
  4. SubscriberKewpieonline
    since 1-Feb-07
    Joined
    20 Jan '09
    Moves
    316705
    11 Apr '16 13:47
    My suggestions: others may have different ideas of course.
    Two series, Quartets and Octets.
    Not duels or threesomes. Small groups can result in several rounds, often involving players who are no longer on the site or who have moved a long way in the ratings.
    Quartets (6 games) and octets (14 games) provide a shorter duration and a more level playing field.

    Two series, Open and Banded.
    Banding in 50s, to provide a reasonable variety of opponents, and a bottom group of 0-1050 or even 0-1000. The presently used limits of 1150 or higher just mean that it's too difficult for beginning players to win a game.
    Two sets of time controls, standard 3/7 and some shorter version, possibly 1/0 or timebank-only.
  5. Joined
    22 Feb '10
    Moves
    81850
    12 Apr '16 11:581 edit
    Originally posted by Kewpie
    My suggestions: others may have different ideas of course.
    Two series, Quartets and Octets.
    [i]Not duels or threesomes. Small groups can result in several rounds, often involving players who are no longer on the site or who have moved a long way in the ratings.
    Quartets (6 games) and octets (14 games) provide a shorter duration and a more level playing f ...[text shortened]... Two sets of time controls, standard 3/7 and some shorter version, possibly 1/0 or timebank-only.
    I would vote for duels and threesomes. I would also agree to quartets if I knew that another would be available at the conclusion of the current one. Anything larger makes for too many concurrent games.

    I would also ask for narrower bands. I've been in the 1750+ band for a long time, and would prefer not to play 2300+-rated players all the time. 50 may be too narrow though.

    Finally, I would like to mention that we need to do something about sandbaggers. I try to avoid tournaments where players are rated 200-300 points below the floor. What good is a 1700-1800 band if a player is actually rated in the 1900s? At the very least, if I beat such a person, it should count as a win against that person's TER, not their current deflated rating.
  6. SubscriberRuss
    RHP Code Monkey
    RHP HQ
    Joined
    21 Feb '01
    Moves
    1795
    14 Apr '16 19:15
    I'm just wrapping up the Android dev, but I will make this the next TODO.
Back to Top