Originally posted by Drew LThat's what was originally implemented. Read the first couple of pages of Thread 58392 to see why it was changed from 365 to 100.
Wouldn't a quick fix just be to increase the amount of time your highest rating stands from 100 to 365 days. That alone would stop most sandbaggers would it not?
Also, how does that solve problem 1 as outlined in my previous post?
D
Originally posted by RagnorakInteresting. The 365 day highest rating was before my time.
That's what was originally implemented. Read the first couple of pages of Thread 58392 to see why it was changed from 365 to 100.
Also, how does that solve problem 1 as outlined in my previous post?
D
1) To solve problem 1 just make a rule where no one who has completed less than 50 (or any number deemed reasonable) can join banded tournaments.
2) I think another way to stop sandbaggers would be to make your tournament entry rating the average rating you have had since the day you signed up.
Is problem 1 really a problem though?
I would have no problem with a person improving throughout a tournament. That person's rating was a true reflection at the time he or she entered the tournament.
Its the people that have been way above the band before and then dropping dramatically that are the problem.
One would wish these people would have the decency not to join in but, all people are different I guess.
Personally I can't understand why people would want to "cheat" with engines and sandbagging. Its not like your RHP rating attracts women.
Or, if it does in your circle, maybe you need to get out a bit more.
Here's another idea: why not make another category of tournament called "Absolute Banded" which uses the all-time high rating of each player to determine entry.
All the cruddy players like myself could then enjoy competition without the fear of getting crushed by a sandbagger.
Originally posted by RDMWhether you personally have a problem with it or not is pretty irrelevant.
Is problem 1 really a problem though?
I would have no problem with a person improving throughout a tournament. That person's rating was a true reflection at the time he or she entered the tournament.
Its the people that have been way above the band before and then dropping dramatically that are the problem.
Surely, the optimal is to have players playing in the correct bands, so that the tournaments aren't ruined for the rest of the properly placed participants.
Just because there are no rules being broken doesn't mean that the system is working as it should. I mean if Kasparov joined tomorrow, his only (banded) option would be to play in a low band, whereas my proposal would place him in a band more suited to his skill level.
We're not talking about players improving during a tournament, we're talking about players who's rating is on the rise, and hasn't reached it's true level yet.
D