Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Site Ideas Forum

Site Ideas Forum

  1. 02 Sep '07 19:17 / 1 edit
    Hi all,

    I was thinking it might be cool if on the main page there was a list of recent tournament winners (maybe the ten most recent?) with their profile icons underneath the three public games display.

    It would be fun for all of us who play in frequent tournaments and will likely recognize the winners.

    Also, it would add a little more prestige to tournament victories, which for the most part go unnoticed by the community.

    For the site, it would also generate interest in tournaments, and consequently, in being a subscriber.
  2. Standard member GalaxyShield
    Mr. Shield
    02 Sep '07 19:48
    Originally posted by SethBorgo
    Hi all,

    I was thinking it might be cool if on the main page there was a list of recent tournament winners (maybe the ten most recent?) with their profile icons underneath the three public games display.

    It would be fun for all of us who play in frequent tournaments and will likely recognize the winners.

    Also, it would add a little more prestige ...[text shortened]... e site, it would also generate interest in tournaments, and consequently, in being a subscriber.
    There is a list of tournament winners in the tournaments section under Overview. But having a smaller list on the main page could be interesting.
  3. 03 Sep '07 10:30
    I'm surprised that statistical stuff like LAST 10 TOURNAMENT WINNERS and LAST 10 CLAN WINNERS isn't used as a marketing tool, an eyecatcher to draw people in to the site.

    Did anybody notice that Tournament 1078 was just won by User 15905, and he hasn't played for 108 days? He probably doesn't even know he's won it.
  4. Standard member Daemon Sin
    I'm A Mighty Pirate™
    03 Sep '07 11:42 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by MissOleum
    I'm surprised that statistical stuff like LAST 10 TOURNAMENT WINNERS and LAST 10 CLAN WINNERS isn't used as a marketing tool, an eyecatcher to draw people in to the site.

    Did anybody notice that Tournament 1078 was just won by User 15905, and he hasn't played for 108 days? He probably doesn't even know he's won it.
    Surprise, surprise! Another low rated banded tournament won by someone 300+ over the maximum rating band.

    Maybe they should stick that on the advert:

    "Come to RHP! Subscribe for only $29.95 and you too could be booted out of a banded tournament by someone who shouldn't even be in it!"
  5. 03 Sep '07 14:53
    Originally posted by MissOleum
    I'm surprised that statistical stuff like LAST 10 TOURNAMENT WINNERS and LAST 10 CLAN WINNERS isn't used as a marketing tool, an eyecatcher to draw people in to the site.

    Did anybody notice that Tournament 1078 was just won by User 15905, and he hasn't played for 108 days? He probably doesn't even know he's won it.
    Exactly my point, I think this might be a suggestion worth looking into for the development staff (haha, if they even read these things).
  6. 03 Sep '07 14:55 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by Daemon Sin
    Surprise, surprise! Another low rated banded tournament won by someone 300+ over the maximum rating band.

    Maybe they should stick that on the advert:

    "Come to RHP! Subscribe for only $29.95 and you too could be booted out of a banded tournament by someone who shouldn't even be in it!"
    I've won low level tournaments when I was down, and others in my current bracket. Of course, I've also lost many more than I've won, possibly to players who were on their way out of the relevant band.

    However, when it comes down to it, a win is a win, and recognition is recognition, and I do think it would sell more subscriptions.
  7. 04 Sep '07 06:45
    Originally posted by Daemon Sin
    Surprise, surprise! Another low rated banded tournament won by someone 300+ over the maximum rating band.

    I think you have it upside down - he's rated 300+ BELOW the maximum rating band.

    But his banding/rating were OK at the time he played, he's just lost a lot of games by timeout since he left.
  8. 04 Sep '07 12:03 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by MissOleum
    I think you have it upside down - he's rated 300+ BELOW the maximum rating band.

    But his banding/rating were OK at the time he played, he's just lost a lot of games by timeout since he left.
    His apparent 'real' rating [according to his graph] is around 1500+ so I think that is what was being pointed out.



    Is that what people call 'sandbagging'?
  9. 04 Sep '07 12:16
    Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
    His apparent 'real' rating [according to his graph] is around 1500+ so I think that is what was being pointed out.



    Is that what people call 'sandbagging'?
    I see a lot of this and it's a real pain. I can't really see any way of preventing it unless the rules on tourney entry rating are changed. It makes a lot of tourneys pointless. Certain users you know are just going to thrash everyone else even though they have a 900 rating in a 1200-1300 tourney. Any ideas anyone? what about atourney rating which is 100 below your highest ever score? Sorry - may have to start a new thread with this. If anyone does have an idea please copy this into a new thread.
    wrt to the idea of recent winners on the front page, I do like it in principal, but I agree it would give the sandbaggers just the publicity they are after.
  10. Standard member Daemon Sin
    I'm A Mighty Pirate™
    04 Sep '07 12:24
    Originally posted by MissOleum
    But his banding/rating were OK at the time he played, he's just lost a lot of games by timeout since he left.
    Considering the Tournament started about 10 months before the first game shown on his rating graph and that the lowest point on his rating before he resigned/timed-out of all the recent games is 1239, could you please explain how you came to that conclusion?
  11. Standard member Daemon Sin
    I'm A Mighty Pirate™
    04 Sep '07 12:25
    Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
    His apparent 'real' rating [according to his graph] is around 1500+ so I think that is what was being pointed out.



    Is that what people call 'sandbagging'?
    Sandbagging is purposely losing or resigning games to lower your rating so you appear worse then you actually are.
  12. 04 Sep '07 15:34
    Ok... we're getting a little off topic. I'd appreciate it if you guys started another thread maybe about tournament entry.

    OR you could consider the fact that if you are playing tournament chess (unless you are Garry Kasparov) you probably are going to end up playing stronger players. I've played in 35+ tournaments and I haven't found any 1800s posing as 1300s or anything like that in any of them.
  13. 04 Sep '07 17:26 / 1 edit
    As for the site idea - I disagree, the only people who would look at them are the people who had won one recently. Let me guess borgo, you just won one did you?

    As for encouraging people to subscribe - that is pure rubbish - nobody would subscribe just for the hope of having a future tournament victory stuck up on the front page...temporarily.
  14. 05 Sep '07 05:07
    Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
    As for the site idea - I disagree, the only people who would look at them are the people who had won one recently. Let me guess borgo, you just won one did you?

    As for encouraging people to subscribe - that is pure rubbish - nobody would subscribe just for the hope of having a future tournament victory stuck up on the front page...temporarily.
    Yes he did as a matter of fact. About 2-3 months ago I believe.
  15. 05 Sep '07 08:15
    Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
    As for the site idea - I disagree, the only people who would look at them are the people who had won one recently. Let me guess borgo, you just won one did you?

    As for encouraging people to subscribe - that is pure rubbish - nobody would subscribe just for the hope of having a future tournament victory stuck up on the front page...temporarily.
    First, I've won a couple of tournaments in the last few months, yes, why else would I have thought of this? And second, I do think some people would think it is cool to win and get recognized, its very naive to say otherwise. Just because someone might not subscribe simply because of this feature, doesn't mean it wouldn't make subscriptions more appealing in one more small way.