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

Tournaments Forum

  1. 17 Jun '05 00:05 / 2 edits
    Say you're looking at a player's profile who is rated somewhere around 1900, and you see that he has a couple tournament victories in rating-banded tournies around 1600-1700. Do you immediately assume that this player entered these knowing he was a much stronger player than his opponents (say maybe he had just gotten timed out in a bunch of games and hence had a lower rating at the time), or does anyone here think that he has simply gotten better over time and that he won those back when he was of average strength? You would think some would just look immediately at the player's rating graph, but those can only show so much..... Was just wondering what everyone's intial reaction usually is. With some players it's obvious, like Trackhead, who has wins in 1100-1200 tournies while he's over 2000+, but with most it's definitely not that obvious.


    -Kev
  2. Standard member XanthosNZ
    Cancerous Bus Crash
    17 Jun '05 03:34
    Originally posted by seraphimvulture
    Say you're looking at a player's profile who is rated somewhere around 1900, and you see that he has a couple tournament victories in rating-banded tournies around 1600-1700. Do you immediately assume that this player entered these knowing he was a much stronger player than his opponents (say maybe he had just gotten timed out in a bunch of games a ...[text shortened]... 1200 tournies while he's over 2000+, but with most it's definitely not that obvious.


    -Kev
    Why look at their tournament wins? I spend more time looking at the openings they play (if they are an opponent) or forum posts and scores against equally rated opponents (if they are a possible clan member).
  3. 17 Jun '05 03:45
    Originally posted by XanthosNZ
    Why look at their tournament wins? I spend more time looking at the openings they play (if they are an opponent) or forum posts and scores against equally rated opponents (if they are a possible clan member).
    If you don't bother looking at an opponent's tourney wins then the question really isn't for you, dude...
  4. Standard member nickybutt
    Lost
    17 Jun '05 07:22
    Originally posted by seraphimvulture
    Say you're looking at a player's profile who is rated somewhere around 1900, and you see that he has a couple tournament victories in rating-banded tournies around 1600-1700. Do you immediately assume that this player entered these knowing he was a much stronger player than his opponents (say maybe he had just gotten timed out in a bunch of games a ...[text shortened]... 1200 tournies while he's over 2000+, but with most it's definitely not that obvious.


    -Kev
    good question.
    My initial response is a sense of pity. That the player in question have so little confidence that he needs to boost their ego playing weaker opponents. Then, if I bother, I look at when the tournament was won. If it's a TRACKHEAD win then all my respect is gone, but if it's a fckallie win, then I have no problem with it.

    (TRACKHEAD win: Win in banded after massive timeouts. You know you are better than the rating band.
    fckallie win: Win in banded in the beginning of one's RHP membership. You don't know what your actual RHP rating is.)
  5. 19 Jun '05 22:56
    Originally posted by nickybutt
    good question.
    My initial response is a sense of pity. That the player in question have so little confidence that he needs to boost their ego playing weaker opponents. Then, if I bother, I look at when the tournament was won. If it's a TRACKHEAD win then all my respect is gone, but if it's a fckallie win, then I have no problem with it.

    (TRACKHEAD wi ...[text shortened]... ed in the beginning of one's RHP membership. You don't know what your actual RHP rating is.)
    It's not just a confidence thing. I have noticed that a lot of players in tournaments tend to play a lot better than their rating suggests they might. This has a knock on effect of players regarding tournament games at their own 'natural rating', to be too difficult. Hence, they go for lower rated tournaments. This is probably brought about by a small minority of cowards, who are trying to win an easy tourny. Also, players that have a sudden drop in form can only enter the banded tournies that are dictated by their rating.
  6. Standard member Exy
    Damn fine Clan!
    23 Jun '05 11:57
    Perhaps the 30 day highest rating rule is too short, maybe it should be 90 days.
  7. 23 Jun '05 18:20
    Originally posted by Exy
    Perhaps the 30 day highest rating rule is too short, maybe it should be 90 days.
    I like it.
  8. Standard member nickybutt
    Lost
    23 Jun '05 21:08 / 1 edit
    I like the idea of a rating floor, I think there is a thread about it in the Site ideas forum. You take the highest rating of a person and subtract a number (e.g. 200) and that's the floor. That leaves room for rating fluctuations, and prevents timeouters to join low banded tournaments.

    Edit: Of course combined with the 30 days highest rating rule.
  9. 23 Jun '05 23:19
    Originally posted by nickybutt
    I like the idea of a rating floor, I think there is a thread about it in the Site ideas forum. You take the highest rating of a person and subtract a number (e.g. 200) and that's the floor. That leaves room for rating fluctuations, and prevents timeouters to join low banded tournaments.

    Edit: Of course combined with the 30 days highest rating rule.
    What thread would this be? Intriguing idea...
  10. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    24 Jun '05 07:32
    Originally posted by seraphimvulture
    Say you're looking at a player's profile who is rated somewhere around 1900, and you see that he has a couple tournament victories in rating-banded tournies around 1600-1700. Do you immediately assume that this player entered these knowing he was a much stronger player than his opponents (say maybe he had just gotten timed out in a bunch of games a ...[text shortened]... 1200 tournies while he's over 2000+, but with most it's definitely not that obvious.


    -Kev
    That probably means he entered the tournament when he was like a 1690 and went up from there.
  11. Standard member nickybutt
    Lost
    24 Jun '05 08:53
    Originally posted by seraphimvulture
    What thread would this be? Intriguing idea...
    It wasn't easy to find, but here it is:
    http://www.chessatwork.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=22232
    Regards, nickybutt
  12. Standard member flexmore
    Quack Quack Quack !
    24 Jun '05 11:11 / 3 edits
    Originally posted by nickybutt
    ...If it's a TRACKHEAD win then all my respect is gone, but if it's a fckallie win, then I have no problem with it.

    (TRACKHEAD win: Win in banded after massive timeouts. You know you are better than the rating band....
    mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

    i agree with the theory ... strong players winning tournaments designed to keep strong players out is obviously a naughtiness.

    but your facts?

    exactly which low rater tournament did TRACKHEAD win?

    i will tell you, because you obviously cannot be bothered with the truth: ....

    ... TRACKHEAD21 NEVER WON A BANDED TOURNAMENT!

    .... TRACKHEAD21 won 6 tournaments in a very short period of time ...
    ... absolutely none had a rating limit.

    look at the facts next time you want to try to spit on the grave of the deceased (account).
  13. Standard member nickybutt
    Lost
    24 Jun '05 13:18
    Originally posted by flexmore
    mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

    i agree with the theory ... strong players winning tournaments designed to keep strong players out is obviously a naughtiness.

    but your facts?

    exactly which low rater tournament did TRACKHEAD win?

    i will tell you, because you obviously cannot be bothered with the truth: ....

    ... TRACKHEAD21 [b]NEVER
    WON A BANDED TOURNAM ...[text shortened]... ]

    look at the facts next time you want to try to spit on the grave of the deceased (account).[/b]
    You are of course right about TRACKHEAD never having won a banded tournament, but had he continued playing here he almost certainly would have. He was however timed out in the Mu Banded 4x4 1200-1399, a tournament he, in his own words, considered a 'sorry win'. As far as I could tell ha had no intentions of not playing to the end, had he stayed.
  14. Standard member Aiko
    Nearing 200000...!
    24 Jun '05 13:59
    I must agree with Nicky, if he could, he would have done it. Prove can be found somewhere on one of the forums. He stated somewhere he entered alle available tournaments to get games going quickly. And was not planning on resigning because he wanted to get back to the original high rating as soon as possible. You don't resign against low rated players when you want to get to the top again.
  15. 24 Jun '05 16:52
    Originally posted by flexmore
    mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

    i agree with the theory ... strong players winning tournaments designed to keep strong players out is obviously a naughtiness.

    but your facts?

    exactly which low rater tournament did TRACKHEAD win?

    i will tell you, because you obviously cannot be bothered with the truth: ....

    ... TRACKHEAD21 [b]NEVER
    WON A BANDED TOURNAM ...[text shortened]... ]

    look at the facts next time you want to try to spit on the grave of the deceased (account).[/b]
    My memory must have mistaken me then, for I was sure I recalled seeing a 1100-1200 victory on his profile. Regardless though, since mostly everyone who visits this forum recalls the argument over him joining all those Mini Banded tournies.