I've never gotten out of a single round in any kind of tournament. Not even a banded one. One particular tournament woke me up to a problem. In the first round of a banded tournament, I was in a "foursome" and every one of the other players either was....or was recently, several hundred points higher.
I would have even won this years Automn 1300-1399...coming in second to a guy who is now rated over 1600. He WAS rated over 1600 before timing out more than 25 games.
I'm usually in the 1300's....but I have at times cracked into the 1500s (and then get smakced right back down). BUT, my rating falls because I play and LOOSE...not becuase I time out or resign a bunch of games.
The "30 day window" is not enough to weed these guys out.
Originally posted by nonnymoose I've never gotten out of a single round in any kind of tournament. Not even a banded one. One particular tournament woke me up to a problem. In the first round of a banded tournament, I was in a "foursome" and every one of the other players either was....or was recently, several hundred points higher.
I would have even won this years Automn 1300- ...[text shortened]... r resign a bunch of games.
The "30 day window" is not enough to weed these guys out.
Lee
I agree. I would like to see ratings taken from 90 days instead of the 30 days we now have.It would give a fairer reflection of the players ability.
How about tournament moderators? A couple people who go through tournaments and look at people's rating graph to see what they're rating history is. I'll volunteer to be one if nobody else wants to (yes I know I'm unsubscribed but I should have it back within a couple days).
Originally posted by XanthosNZ What we need is more threads about this.
Nah...what we need are more posts on threads where the people posting aren't interested in the thread topic. If you aren't interested -- don't read it.