1. Standard memberflexmore
    Quack Quack Quack !
    Chesstralia
    Joined
    18 Aug '03
    Moves
    54533
    23 Apr '05 02:123 edits
    i like the setup!
    with the small bands of only 50 points, almost all opponents will be formidable, yet conquerable.

    unfortunately, the small tournament size in the central bands, means that most 1200-1500 players have no chance of entering
    i have a suggested improvement for next time though ....

    next time: why not make them all minimum 4 players and maximum 120 players, then the busiest central bands will have a very large tournament and the outer bands will only have very small tournaments ... and everyone gets to play.

    when they all go green ... then start the lot.

    PS oh and let ironman31 into the top band 😉
    PPS if the timebank was longer then i would play too.
  2. Standard memberAiko
    Nearing 200000...!
    Joined
    23 Mar '04
    Moves
    208554
    23 Apr '05 11:01
    Good idea. And specially for those like flexmore add some long haul banded one's every now and then.
  3. Standard memberflexmore
    Quack Quack Quack !
    Chesstralia
    Joined
    18 Aug '03
    Moves
    54533
    23 Apr '05 11:15
    Originally posted by Aiko
    Good idea. And specially for those like flexmore add some long haul banded one's every now and then.
    thanks 🙂

    to clarify my preference:

    i like long timebank ...and short timeout.

    a long holiday or a deep think on a few vital moves, but generally regular play.

    i prefer 2/28 or 3/28 or 4/28.
  4. Standard memberAlcra
    Lazy Sod
    Everywhere
    Joined
    12 Oct '04
    Moves
    8623
    23 Apr '05 14:53
    Originally posted by flexmore
    i like the setup!
    with the small bands of only 50 points, almost all opponents will be formidable, yet conquerable.

    unfortunately, the small tournament size in the central bands, means that most 1200-1500 players have no chance of entering
    i have a suggested improvement for next time though ....

    next time: why not make them all [b]minimum 4 player ...[text shortened]... oh and let ironman31 into the top band 😉
    PPS if the timebank was longer then i would play too.
    Great idea!!! (Three exclamations is the borderline of sanity, otherwise you would get a few more).

    Sort of like a mega-banded 1400-1450? Would also increase the prestige of winning (and lessen the humiliation of defeat 😳 ).

  5. Standard memberxs
    Incroyant
    tinyurl.com/ksdwu
    Joined
    22 Sep '04
    Moves
    4728
    24 Apr '05 18:12
    Although Russ won't admit it this was my idea. 😉

    http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=21481&page=1
  6. Standard memberchuck l
    nothing good to say
    middletown pa, usa
    Joined
    15 Apr '05
    Moves
    4737
    25 Apr '05 01:16
    Originally posted by flexmore
    i like the setup!
    with the small bands of only 50 points, almost all opponents will be formidable, yet conquerable.

    unfortunately, the small tournament size in the central bands, means that most 1200-1500 players have no chance of entering
    i have a suggested improvement for next time though ....

    next time: why not make them all [b]minimum 4 player ...[text shortened]... oh and let ironman31 into the top band 😉
    PPS if the timebank was longer then i would play too.
    this idea has my vote as well.....
  7. Standard memberGalaxyShield
    Mr. Shield
    Joined
    02 Sep '04
    Moves
    174290
    25 Apr '05 02:13
    Very good idea, get's a rec.
  8. Standard memberflexmore
    Quack Quack Quack !
    Chesstralia
    Joined
    18 Aug '03
    Moves
    54533
    25 Apr '05 08:34
    for banded tournies:

    if a player's rating exceeds the upper limit of the band they have entered then:
    they should be automatically removed from the band they are in and entered into the band above.
  9. Joined
    10 Feb '03
    Moves
    12969
    25 Apr '05 09:07
    Originally posted by flexmore
    for banded tournies:

    if a player's rating exceeds the upper limit of the band they have entered then:
    they should be automatically removed from the band they are in and entered into the band above.
    So what you are really suggesting is that a series of tight-banded tourneys are started similtaneously: people enter the series as opposed to a particular tourney, the players being allocated to the tourney appropriate to their (30-day max) rating when the series starts.
    There might be the odd band that fails to get its minimum but nothing is perfect and it sounds like a good idea.
  10. Standard memberflexmore
    Quack Quack Quack !
    Chesstralia
    Joined
    18 Aug '03
    Moves
    54533
    25 Apr '05 09:14
    Originally posted by Toe
    So what you are really suggesting is that a series of tight-banded tourneys are started similtaneously: people enter the series as opposed to a particular tourney, the players being allocated to the tourney appropriate to their (30-day max) rating when the series starts.
    There might be the odd band that fails to get its minimum but nothing is perfect and it sounds like a good idea.
    yes.
  11. Standard memberCrowley
    Not Aleister
    Control room
    Joined
    17 Apr '02
    Moves
    91690
    25 Apr '05 10:291 edit
    Originally posted by flexmore

    next time: why not make them all [b]minimum 4 players and maximum 120 players
    , then the busiest central bands will have a very large tournament and the outer bands will only have very small tournaments ... and everyone gets to play.
    [/b]
    Now that's a good idea!
    Everyone (including me 😠) gets to play!
Back to Top