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

Site Ideas Forum

  1. 18 Oct '05 02:31
    Has anyone noticed that the Siege boards are ruled by a handful of the top players?

    Why not sort the sieges by rating?

    For example:
    the red board would be for players 2000 and above
    the green board for players 1800 - 1999
    the blue board for players 1600 - 1799
    the yellow board for players 1400 - 1599
    the purple board for players 1200 - 1399
    the orange board for all players below 1199

    You could announce a gentleman's understanding that a player whose rating has gone above or below the alotted parameters (perhaps by a certain margin, perhaps not) should forfeit.

    You could leave everything as it is. The time controls, the numbers of boards, etc.

    This way a 1500 rated player can have the chance to run a board for a while without being forced off by any 2000 who comes along.

    -oishi
  2. Standard member Saint Nick
    Pimp of the elves
    18 Oct '05 04:20
    Originally posted by oishi
    [

    You could announce a gentleman's understanding that a player whose rating has gone above or below the alotted parameters (perhaps by a certain margin, perhaps not) should forfeit.
    I think boards by rating are a great idea, but people leaving because their rating is too high just won't happen. I think they would have to be forced out at the start of the next game.

    Take a look at the banded tournies. Espcially the ones that are over or nearly over. You'll see very clear proof that people do not forfeit becuase thier rating is too high, even if it is 400 or 500 points over the rating band.
  3. Standard member XanthosNZ
    Cancerous Bus Crash
    18 Oct '05 07:50
    Originally posted by Saint Nick
    I think boards by rating are a great idea, but people leaving because their rating is too high just won't happen. I think they would have to be forced out at the start of the next game.

    Take a look at the banded tournies. Espcially the ones that are over or nearly over. You'll see very clear proof that people do not forfeit becuase thier rating is too high, even if it is 400 or 500 points over the rating band.
    To be fair nowhere is there anything saying people should resign from tournaments when rated too high for the banding.
  4. Standard member rhb
    Ginger Scum
    18 Oct '05 11:29 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by oishi
    Has anyone noticed that the Siege boards are ruled by a handful of the top players?

    Why not sort the sieges by rating?

    For example:
    the red board would be for players 2000 and above
    the green board for players 1800 - 1999
    the blue board for players 1600 - 1799
    the yellow board for players 1400 - 1599
    the purple board for players 1200 - 1399
    the ora ...[text shortened]... hance to run a board for a while without being forced off by any 2000 who comes along.

    -oishi
    I was only thinking similar yesterday.

    Agree with Saint Nick about the system doing the limiting based on rating though.
  5. Subscriber Ponderable
    chemist
    18 Oct '05 11:48
    I support the idea of banded sieges.

    MAybe it would be the way to go not to start a new game with a player vastly out of the badn (say 200+) since players tend to oscillate somewhat.
    A siege defender being forced out, could get an honourable mention at his profile (...leaving the blue castle unbeaten... or something to that effect)
  6. 18 Oct '05 12:08
    While we are at it... Let's get some Thematic sieges going as well.

    --tmetzler
  7. 18 Oct '05 12:47
    Originally posted by tmetzler
    While we are at it... Let's get some Thematic sieges going as well.

    --tmetzler
    The next thing you'll be asking for is thematic leagues.
  8. Standard member gotti2000
    The winemaker
    19 Oct '05 16:52
    Originally posted by rhb
    I was only thinking similar yesterday.

    Agree with Saint Nick about the system doing the limiting based on rating though.
    I was only thinking similar a year ago :-)
    http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=14138
  9. 25 Oct '05 15:38
    Originally posted by oishi
    Has anyone noticed that the Siege boards are ruled by a handful of the top players?

    Why not sort the sieges by rating?

    For example:
    the red board would be for players 2000 and above
    the green board for players 1800 - 1999
    the blue board for players 1600 - 1799
    the yellow board for players 1400 - 1599
    the purple board for players 1200 - 1399
    the ora ...[text shortened]... hance to run a board for a while without being forced off by any 2000 who comes along.

    -oishi
    So what does it take to get something implemented?
  10. Standard member Thecyl
    THE ART OF WAR
    26 Oct '05 02:27
    talking about sieges...

    Am I the only one that thinks some people are actually just blocking their place up there?

    or can somebody explain to me how someone is not able to make a single move on the siege board for 7 (SEVEN) MONTHS!!!! but last move was a few hours ago!!!!!

    I think the siege games are great but frankly I don't see myself getting a shot at the board for the next 2 years, that is just a joke.

    Would it realy be that hard to implement an automated timeout system like in regular tournaments?

    Just have a look at this board and maybe somebody here can explain to me what is going on there. Maybe I am seeing it all wrong if so please correct me. Thanks

    1026099 there is also something written there about resignation but then why does it not move to the next player in the queue?