1. Standard memberrandolph
    the walrus
    an English garden
    Joined
    15 Jan '08
    Moves
    32836
    20 Mar '10 05:20
    Originally posted by ptriple42
    Hi green,
    much improved contribution,congrats.No,I still have no idea how to implement a time limit on tournaments because it would be a RHP software problem,isn't it?

    You're right,that 2003 tourn.is called Having Fun. Do you call that fun, to be in a tournament not finished after 7 years?!

    Off the mark again about my wish to remove fun from them.It ...[text shortened]... when my opponent makes a mistake,be it lack of attention or overload.That is no fun for me.
    Yeah, because caissad4's play is so inaccurate.
  2. Standard memberclandarkfire
    Grammar Nazi
    Auschwitz
    Joined
    03 Apr '06
    Moves
    44348
    20 Mar '10 22:112 edits
    Originally posted by ptriple42
    Hi green,
    much improved contribution,congrats.No,I still have no idea how to implement a time limit on tournaments because it would be a RHP software problem,isn't it?

    You're right,that 2003 tourn.is called Having Fun. Do you call that fun, to be in a tournament not finished after 7 years?!

    Off the mark again about my wish to remove fun from them.It when my opponent makes a mistake,be it lack of attention or overload.That is no fun for me.
    Dude, out of the entire RHP community, you may be lucky if you can get three people to agree with you. Your idea sucks. Get over, and move on. If I want to play 3000 games at once, and I stay within the timelimits, I can do whatever I want. Deal with it.


    You have 8 games in progress. Want to play faster? Join faster tournaments, or start another 30 games. There are plenty of people on this site with a lot of games in progress that play much better chess than you do, so you idea that people with lots of games in progress don't play accuratly is BS as well. People pay to use this site because they can play as much or as little as they want to.

    Here are a few examples off the top of my head of a few players with lots of games in progress or who have had lots in the past who play very good chess:

    User 350028
    User 462807
    User 129166
    User 66723

    Oh, and you said there is no fun in a tournament that lasts seven years. Why is there no fun in it? I'm sure the entrants enjoy.

    For examply, I recently asked Chris to create Tournament 9525. It's been filling up rapidly, and the entrants are willing realize it will take a while. Chances are, it won't finish for 3-5 years. Everyone understands that, and that makes it all the more fun. Imagine the prestige of haveing such a tournament listed on your profile.
  3. Joined
    02 Aug '08
    Moves
    14005
    21 Mar '10 08:42
    Dude,your arrogance is clouding your judgement.

    Those 4 very good "heavy-load" players you cite (out of 29000+ players) may not delay tournaments but most "heavy-load" players do,and that's a fact. They're not breaking the rules? Who says they are?! But they should be in Hardcore,Long Hauls, 21 days,etc. and not in 3/7 and 7/14. Why? Because,in my opinion,these should cater for the most of us who like to play chess regularly/daily - not like marbles but chess - and cannot.

    Tell me: a) why do other sites impose a limit on the number of games playable?
    b) why does any other game/sport has time-limits and set dates not only for games but also tournaments/championships?

    The current regulations favour the "heavy-loaders" to the detriment of all the rest - and it puzzles me how an intelligent person like you cannot see that.

    As for your enjoyment of a tournament lasting 3-5years,well, that's your prerogative and that tournament was designed for such a length of time,isn't it?
  4. Joined
    10 Jan '08
    Moves
    16940
    21 Mar '10 08:58
    Originally posted by ptriple42
    The current regulations favour the "heavy-loaders" to the detriment of all the rest - and it puzzles me how an intelligent person like you cannot see that.
    dude seriously. two threads going over this and you still don't get it.

    for every 'heavy-loader' 'holding up' a tournament there's a guy who's playing about 20 games doing the exact same... we all play at our own pace within the time controls given to us, like many have said if you want games were you'll get a lot of regular moves then play with low time controls and if you're not able to do that for whatever reason stuck it up and accept that not everyone will be playing regularly... for whatever reason. game load, limited internet time, likes to take their time over moves... whatever, does it really matter which one?

    just let it go.
  5. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    21 Mar '10 09:03
    Originally posted by trev33
    dude seriously. two threads going over this and you still don't get it.

    for every 'heavy-loader' 'holding up' a tournament there's a guy who's playing about 20 games doing the exact same... we all play at our own pace within the time controls given to us, like many have said if you want games were you'll get a lot of regular moves then play with low time ...[text shortened]... their time over moves... whatever, does it really matter which one?

    just let it go.
    Trev is right. Let it go.
  6. Joined
    02 Aug '08
    Moves
    14005
    21 Mar '10 09:15
    Dudes,I get it very well...but this is supposed to be a debate, with arguments back and forth. I've answered all your questions but you've not answered mine....If you have no answers/arguments, keep quiet,let the clever ones demolish my arguments.
  7. Joined
    10 Jan '08
    Moves
    16940
    21 Mar '10 09:46
    Originally posted by ptriple42
    Dudes,I get it very well...but this is supposed to be a debate, with arguments back and forth. I've answered all your questions but you've not answered mine....If you have no answers/arguments, keep quiet,let the clever ones demolish my arguments.
    for a debate you've emphatically failed to answer my questions. in both your threads. there really is no debate here though, there's just one dude making him/herself look moronic. are you related to very rusty?
  8. Joined
    20 Mar '08
    Moves
    9891
    21 Mar '10 10:34
    Trev, you put no questions - that requires this symbol "?"...

    Your profile defines you very well so...go back to your "contemplation of life on the toilet looking at the tiles"...
  9. Standard memberpeacedog
    Highlander
    SEAsia
    Joined
    24 Nov '08
    Moves
    9868
    21 Mar '10 11:27
    Originally posted by ptriple42
    Dudes,I get it very well...but this is supposed to be a debate, with arguments back and forth. I've answered all your questions but you've not answered mine....If you have no answers/arguments, keep quiet,let the clever ones demolish my arguments.
    So if I get this right, you don't want a fast tourn but want a slow tourn were everyone moves fast.

    Am I the only one who is confused?
  10. Joined
    10 Jan '08
    Moves
    16940
    21 Mar '10 11:39
    Originally posted by c antunes
    Trev, you put no questions - that requires this symbol "?"...

    Your profile defines you very well so...go back to your "contemplation of life on the toilet looking at the tiles"...
    accept that not everyone will be playing regularly... for whatever reason. game load, limited internet time, likes to take their time over moves... whatever, does it really matter which one?


    omg i see the symbol "?"... funny you failed to.
  11. Joined
    10 Jan '08
    Moves
    16940
    21 Mar '10 11:43
    Originally posted by peacedog
    So if I get this right, you don't want a fast tourn but want a slow tourn were everyone moves fast.

    Am I the only one who is confused?
    xe wants to play 7/14 tournaments were everyone moves regularly... but xe won't be able to play for 2 weeks in each month.

    pretty much sums it up.
  12. Joined
    07 Mar '09
    Moves
    27862
    21 Mar '10 14:21
    Originally posted by adramforall
    Currently there are 30 open tournaments, the largest of which currently has 121 entrants of whom 5 are flying the flag.

    In total there are 9 people with vacation flags flying in all tournaments.

    Stopping these 9 people from signing up is really going to speed up the tournaments.

    As Phlabbabit says what is to stop someone entering a tournmant and going on vacation the next day, or would that not be allowed either under your rules?
    I don't make my suggestion to speed up tournaments. It is to prevent the "atri" fiasco from being repeated.
  13. Joined
    10 Jan '08
    Moves
    16940
    21 Mar '10 14:51
    Originally posted by TerrierJack
    I don't make my suggestion to speed up tournaments. It is to prevent the "atri" fiasco from being repeated.
    and how is preventing people from joining tournaments when on vacation going to stop anyone who wants to play over 2000 games?
  14. Standard memberclandarkfire
    Grammar Nazi
    Auschwitz
    Joined
    03 Apr '06
    Moves
    44348
    21 Mar '10 15:531 edit
    OK, I realize that this "debate" is effectively over, but just to prove my point I'll give you an example.

    A few months back, I played User 146937 in a 7/14 tournament. At the time he had around 20 games in progress. However, he made sure that he always used all of his time time, and the two games ended up lasting about a year each, while other people in the round were already finished. Unlike yourself, I didn't bitch about it, because I knew he was well within his rights.

    Now, last week, I played four games against User 193938, who has 750 games in progress. However, he usually moved at least three times a day, and our games were finished within the week.

    Get my drift?
  15. Joined
    07 Mar '09
    Moves
    27862
    21 Mar '10 20:57
    Originally posted by trev33
    and how is preventing people from joining tournaments when on vacation going to stop anyone who wants to play over 2000 games?
    Because that guy "atri" had hundreds of games where he was not making any moves at all and to drop the vacation flag would have meant most of them finishing with a loss but thanks to the rules he could continue to pile on more games that he wouldn't make moves in. Again, I am not making the complaint of the original OP - he seems to want cake AND ice cream. I would just like a rule that would prevent an obvious abuse. It is the minimum we could do and I can see no way it could affect someone who was actually here to play chess as opposed to watering the feet of their opponents with a substance less pure than tap water.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree