Originally posted by SwissGambit
There are already plenty of subscribers upset over sandbagging. The tournament entry rating has been in place for some time and it has failed to solve the problem. We keep hearing of formerly high-rated players returning with a ridiculously low rating and terrorizing the low-band tourneys.
TER also does nothing to stop sandbagging in other forms of ra ...[text shortened]... t out that the US Chess Federation has used floors for years - they have a proven track record.
USCF rating floors are a different matter. For OTB games, you play one game at a time, and you invest travel and solid chucks of time to actually play. Whatever purpose rating floors have in the USCF, they are not there to combat players resigning 100s of games in a row.
Who would pay real money in entry fees, waste weekend after weekend just to resign over and over?
RHP is different in that there is no game limit, so it cost the perpetrator nothing to take on hundreds of games and let them all time out.
One downside of a rating floor is that a player can become a "points fiat". They sit on their rating floor and lose game after game offering up free points. Then they decide to start playing again and they haven't lost the points they gave away. So there will be the potential to have "rating inflation".
If the players rating falls when the resign 100s of games, the points given away diminishes after 20 or so losses. And when that person decides to play for real again, he on average takes all the points back from the pool. As it is, if I pick up X points from a win, someone is losing X points in a loss. Balance. With rating floors, I could pick up X points for a win, but no one is losing any points for a loss. Inflation.
Personally, I don't prefer playing a sandbagger. But I may lose extra points against them, but I've also got my share of free points when the sandbaggers are in the time-out mode. It balances out.