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

Tournaments Forum

  1. Standard member flexmore
    Quack Quack Quack !
    30 Dec '05 11:16 / 7 edits
    a very few players have a legitimate reason for not being in the tournament of all tournaments.

    but ...

    i think ...

    the most common reason for very strong players not to play in this is ...

    if they enter then they commit to trying to win it ... yet EVERYONE faces the likely-hood of not winning ...
    when they do not win they must face their imperfectness...

    it is the same in otb chess .. at all levels ... kramnik, deep blue, fischer, alekhine, topalov, etc etc have all done this at the highest level ... and every idiot at the lowest level does it also ...

    if you do not play then you do not lose ... they/we think ... WRONG .

    but of course not playing is a loss ... a bigger loss than not winning ... so ... PLAY.

    i hope more players enter .. especially the highest rated players ... they may have to face the fact that they are not perfect... and that is good ... PLAY.
  2. Standard member Vovochka
    Caro-Kann Lover
    30 Dec '05 12:46
    Nice psychoanalysis. Get a rec.
  3. Standard member ark13
    Enola Straight
    30 Dec '05 16:27 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by flexmore
    a very few players have a legitimate reason for not being in the tournament of all tournaments.

    but ...

    i think ...

    the most common reason for very strong players not to play in this is ...

    if they enter then they commit to trying to win it ... yet [b]EVERYONE faces the likely-hood of not winning
    ...
    when they do not win they must face the ...[text shortened]... ayers ... they may have to face the fact that they are not perfect... and that is good ... PLAY.[/b]
    I think...

    maybe...

    a lot of people...

    didn't enter...

    because...

    it's so many...

    games...

    with a crappy...

    timecontrol.
  4. Standard member Gatecrasher
    Whale watching
    30 Dec '05 16:54
    The time control is fine.

    It's 4 months. No timeout, but in many ways it is more flexible than a 1/14 or a 3/7. You can take a 3 week break if you like, no problem.

    We need a fixed period to ensure that 3 rounds can be completed within a year.

    Not much point if the 2006 championships only gets completed in 2009.
  5. Standard member RookRAK
    Out of drinks
    30 Dec '05 18:10
    Originally posted by ark13
    I think...

    maybe...

    a lot of people...

    didn't enter...

    because...

    it's so many...

    games...

    with a crappy...

    timecontrol.
    I have to agree here. I think if you really want the top players at RHP to enter, you can't expect them to play in groups of 12.

    Maybe we should borrow an idea from UEFA Champions League and give the top 50 players a pass into the second round, letting everyone else battle it out in a big group of 12 first round.
  6. Subscriber no1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    30 Dec '05 18:16
    Originally posted by RookRAK
    I have to agree here. I think if you really want the top players at RHP to enter, you can't expect them to play in groups of 12.

    Maybe we should borrow an idea from UEFA Champions League and give the top 50 players a pass into the second round, letting everyone else battle it out in a big group of 12 first round.
    That's a terrible idea; it's a Championship Tournament - no one should get a special advantage. Why not say the higher rated players always get White, too??
  7. Standard member Vovochka
    Caro-Kann Lover
    30 Dec '05 19:07
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    That's a terrible idea; it's a Championship Tournament - no one should get a special advantage. Why not say the higher rated players always get White, too??
    But this idea is not far from what FIDE claims for next championship.
    Israeli chess cup - as far as I know is also played by similar principles. It starts from 1/16 for everyone. 1700+ enter 1/8 together with winners of 1/16. 2000+ enter 1/4 and so on.
  8. Standard member RookRAK
    Out of drinks
    30 Dec '05 19:30
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    That's a terrible idea; it's a Championship Tournament - no one should get a special advantage. Why not say the higher rated players always get White, too??
    Yes, it is a terrible idea. But it's a common thing in many sports for players/teams to get an bye in a first round based on standings/rankings.

    If the thing stopping the top players from entering is not wanting 22 games at a time another option would have to be sought. Smaller groups would bring in more of the top players, but then it would be impossible to get the tournament done in a year.
  9. Subscriber Marinkatomb
    wotagr8game
    30 Dec '05 19:37
    I didn't enter for the simple reason that i can't commit to be online for the rest of the year! Assuming i did somehow manage to stay in the tournament to the final round (though timeouts or something, i'd never play well enough to do it off my own steam), i'd have to make 3-500 moves per month for the next 11 or 12 months. PLUS, i have the stressful thing of looking at 18 ticking clocks every time i log on!
  10. Subscriber no1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    30 Dec '05 20:14
    Originally posted by RookRAK
    Yes, it is a terrible idea. But it's a common thing in many sports for players/teams to get an bye in a first round based on standings/rankings.

    If the thing stopping the top players from entering is not wanting 22 games at a time another option would have to be sought. Smaller groups would bring in more of the top players, but then it would be impossible to get the tournament done in a year.
    If the "top" players don't want to enter, that's up to them. If a special rule is made to favor higher rated players, I'll withdraw and I really don't care if that rule change would benefit me or not. It's patently unfair.
  11. Standard member RookRAK
    Out of drinks
    30 Dec '05 20:53
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    If the "top" players don't want to enter, that's up to them. If a special rule is made to favor higher rated players, I'll withdraw and I really don't care if that rule change would benefit me or not. It's patently unfair.
    No1 - I'm not trying to push a rule through, or even propose it.

    It just got me thinking, that with all the smart players on this site, we ought to be able to solve a simple problem of how to have a true RHP championship which:

    a) is open to everyone
    b) finishes in a year
    c) has terms which makes it likely most top players want to play

    The current tournament addresses the first two.
  12. Subscriber no1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    30 Dec '05 21:01
    Originally posted by RookRAK
    No1 - I'm not trying to push a rule through, or even propose it.

    It just got me thinking, that with all the smart players on this site, we ought to be able to solve a simple problem of how to have a true RHP championship which:

    a) is open to everyone
    b) finishes in a year
    c) has terms which makes it likely most top players want to play

    The current tournament addresses the first two.
    Pony up a $1,000 prize money from your piggy bank.
  13. Standard member RookRAK
    Out of drinks
    30 Dec '05 21:22
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Pony up a $1,000 prize money from your piggy bank.
    the check is in the mail 😛
  14. Standard member cludi
    Blogger
    30 Dec '05 21:25 / 1 edit
    I actually think RookRAK has a point here.
    Seeding players for next round is unfair - yes, I agree no1
    But you have to admit that there are a few advantages

    1. The top 10 players may be more willing to participate as they don't have to play 22 or so games against probably much lower rated players
    2. The first round becomes MUCH more interesting for the lower rated players as they all of the sudden have a realistic chance of making it to the 2nd round and have a go with several of the highest rated players on this site

    Unfair or not, the 2 effects above would result in a lot more participants, I'm sure.

    Just a side note: Although Northern Lad pointed the time controls as a reason for not playing, I can't believe that thay should be the reason for the top players not playing. I think they're just fine.
  15. Standard member Ravello
    The Rude©
    30 Dec '05 21:36
    What's all this fuss about?

    Who cares if top players don't want to play in that (crappy) "championship"?

    If they want they enter,if not they don't.Period.