Originally posted by mikebind
I'm not sure that it makes sense to restrict people's entry based on move frequency. What is wrong with a player who moves frequently who also wishes to participate in a tournament with slower time controls?
I propose an alternative, what about setting up tournaments which have a fixed start date and pre-set group size (say 12 or so) but no pre-set limi ...[text shortened]... but maybe it would be worth it if enough people think it's a good idea. So, what do you think?
That's not a bad idea at all. I presume that you're suggesting an unlimited size for both fast and slow tournys? As long as the group size is pre-defined (e.g. 2, 4, 8) and not decided as a precentage of total entrants (e.g. 100!) then it would work well. There would be plenty of spaces on the fast tournaments, and the slow ones wouldn't be overwhelmed by those that don't give a fig about the time settings and who they may be excluding.
A couple of worries though:
1. the tournament page with the links to each game is already slow presumably because it has to look up the result and id of each and every game. This would be made worse.
2. the _number_ of fast tournaments would have to stay the same so that regular tourny players wouldn't loose out on the proportion of games they get from these contests.
3. a large slow tournament would take even longer to finish, though I can't see any of the slow players having a problem with it.
Given the incremental nature of development in this site I think that the best solution is one that would take minimal amount of development. Given the nature of the community here - not backwards in coming forwards - I think the best solution would be the one that p!sses the least number of people off , the least controversial.
Having free-sized tournys or restricting entry by profile-set move-frequency are LOW in development costs, and non-contentious!