Do you intentionally lose games via timeout to keep your rating down, then, win games in important tournaments / games, like the ones in the 2007 Championship?
What's with this? You appear to be an 1800+ player....
Originally posted by Ramned Do you intentionally lose games via timeout to keep your rating down, then, win games in important tournaments / games, like the ones in the 2007 Championship?
What's with this? You appear to be an 1800+ player....
Just for kicks got through the completed tournaments and see how many winners are over the band by a substantional margin. I was reading through the results and they make the whole tournament win thing look stupid. It dose'nt look as though the new system is working.
Originally posted by cheshirecatstevens Just for kicks got through the completed tournaments and see how many winners are over the band by a substantional margin. I was reading through the results and they make the whole tournament win thing look stupid. It dose'nt look as though the new system is working.
Iam afraid it goes without saying that people who win tournaments are improving and are therefore likely to be rated considerably higher when a tournament is over than when it started.
I think you will actually see a fair number of wins from lower rated players in banded tournaments and this proves to a certain extent that it does work.
Originally posted by Ramned Do you intentionally lose games via timeout to keep your rating down, then, win games in important tournaments / games, like the ones in the 2007 Championship?
What's with this? You appear to be an 1800+ player....
Originally posted by Dragon Fire Iam afraid it goes without saying that people who win tournaments are improving and are therefore likely to be rated considerably higher when a tournament is over than when it started.
I think you will actually see a fair number of wins from lower rated players in banded tournaments and this proves to a certain extent that it does work.
Did you go through some between 0-1500 levels. Yes there will be improvement but I was in those tournaments and when you look through them you will see that the winners usually are near perfect. In my opinion tournaments are the funnest when they are competitive for all entrants. There is a fundamental difference between a 1200 level player rising up and playing at a 1500 level after a time.Now take RusellR for example not to pick on him, but he won 4 sub 1300 tournaments in a row. I didn't find a loss I admit I didn't look through all his games. Are you going to tell me it was a matter of study and hard work?
Originally posted by cheshirecatstevens Just for kicks got through the completed tournaments and see how many winners are over the band by a substantional margin. I was reading through the results and they make the whole tournament win thing look stupid. It dose'nt look as though the new system is working.
You have to remember that most of the completed tournaments were started before the new system was implemented.
Hopefully banded tournaments started since December 2006, looking at tournament 1650 ->. Only one tournament started since then has finished that was
Tournament 1715 and the winner is only 57 points higher than the ratings limit for the tournament.
One banded tournament I am in started way back in December 2005 for 1200-1399 Tournament 914 looks likely to be won by someone rated 1700+
However when you look at the ratings of their opponents most have been 1350 or less. Wins against opponents rated 1550+ are very few, so is this really a 1700 rated player or just a good 1450 player winning a high %age of games against lower rated opponents which has boosted their rating?
I was knocked out of Tournament 1185 a banded 1600-1700 tournament and Tournament 1186 a 1700-1900 tournament so "higher rated" players don't have it all their own way.
In Tournament 1196 all the final 6 players in this 1700-1800 banded tournament were well over 1800 when round 2 started.
18 Mar '07 18:54
Procurer
Back to Top