I have just entered the Scandinavian Thematic......for the 2nd Tourmanent in a row i entering the groupings seem farcical!
I am in agroup with a fellow 2000+ playerand two guys above 1500
Yet there is another group where the highest rated player is less than 1500+
Another tournament I was in Sprint Split XXXII I was in with a fellow 2000+player and a 1850 playerand the other group had no-one over 1850 in the group.
Would it be so difficult to set a kind of seeding system so the best players are not getting knocked out in the early rounds as in other spots like Tennis etc!
Originally posted by najdorfslayerYes, I noticed that too often and would like to see a seeding system put in place as well.
I have just entered the Scandinavian Thematic......for the 2nd Tourmanent in a row i entering the groupings seem farcical!
I am in agroup with a fellow 2000+ playerand two guys above 1500
Yet there is another group where the highest rated player is less than 1500+
Another tournament I was in Sprint Split XXXII I was in with a fellow 2000+playe ...[text shortened]... best players are not getting knocked out in the early rounds as in other spots like Tennis etc!
The irony about the current system is that if you ever make it to the 2nd round and you were in the higher rated group, you have a "better" chance of winning the tournament, though it may not be as challenging.
So? If you're good enough to beat the tough competition in the first round, you'll be good enough to beat whatever comes after it. At least now you have a couple 1500's getting through and getting some good experience against quality players. Where as if you use seeding, no lower players get through and you end up playing more tough games than you are now. I don't see why the 1500's would even keep entering if they have no chance of moving on.
I'm fine with random pairings. I get tough and weak competition randomly in different tournaments, it's how it goes. If you happen to get a bad draw, tough luck. If you can't beat them you don't deserve the win anyway. I usually end up 3rd or 4th highest rated in the splits I enter, with no real chance of winning (2000+), but I hope for the best.
Take it as a challenge and get as much experience as you can. Who knows, you might even make it through.
Edit: Seeding for special tournaments would be interesting (like the annual championship), but on a general scale I like the way the system is. Good variety. If you want more seeded, request an original pairing tourney.
These are, of course, just my opinions.
heh, this was what i was thinking the whole time, didnt want to feel the wrath of the chess superchamps 😞
they dont give 2nd place awards, so losing in the 1st round to the guy who ends up winning the thing would be the same as beating some easier player and losing to him in the finals..
Originally posted by najdorfslayerWhy bother with all the crappy games in the 1st, 2nd etc rounds?
I have just entered the Scandinavian Thematic......for the 2nd Tourmanent in a row i entering the groupings seem farcical!
I am in agroup with a fellow 2000+ playerand two guys above 1500
Yet there is another group where the highest rated player is less than 1500+
Another tournament I was in Sprint Split XXXII I was in with a fellow 2000+playe ...[text shortened]... best players are not getting knocked out in the early rounds as in other spots like Tennis etc!
Just let the two highest rated players play each other to decide who wins the tournaments.
😛
Although I see the point of allowing the underdog a chance, I agree with najdorfslayer and Sicilian Smaug on this.
It seems possible Tournament 2369 : A duel(64 entrants), with the highest rated player playing the 32nd rated player.
Some more examples of IMO terrible seeding:
Tournament 2076
Tournament 2158
Tournament 2010 (round 2) - rating 1 and 2 are in one group, rating 3 and 4 in another...
Originally posted by najdorfslayerbut that would show its fair, anything could happen....
Well I can see the pro's of random pairings but the lower rated players have the banded tourney's......
All I can say is if you were Roger Federer how would you feel if you drew Rafael Nadal in the 1st Round!
i think in the old ufc tournaments they would try to put people on the other side a rig them...
Originally posted by najdorfslayerSo why not just eliminate all the lower rated players and keep the randoms to 1700+? Wouldn't that make it easier for everyone including the admins? It's essentially the same thing you're suggesting since all the higher rateds would probably end up bunched in the last couple of rounds anyway. There's essentially no point in have lower rated players in them except for them having fun and learning from guys like you and Smaug.
Well I can see the pro's of random pairings but the lower rated players have the banded tourney's......
All I can say is if you were Roger Federer how would you feel if you drew Rafael Nadal in the 1st Round!
If I were Roger Federer, I would rather play him in the first round than the last round. Instead of having to anticipate the final and worry about how Nadal is doing, I would know straight off. And if I beat him, it's pretty smooth sailing all the way to the championship. So it's basically the same reasoning to keep it the way it is here: Knowing where you stand right from the get-go.
I'm not saying all seeding is bad, in fact it would be helpful in tournaments like the Championship (that's where the top players really should play each other in the last round or 2nd to last, and people like should fight to get through). We don't have many big tournaments like that though, so using seeding is a little impractical if you use it all the time.