1. Standard memberAsthereal
    Dark Matter
    26 Jul '05
    30 Jul '07 19:18
    I really agree with galaxyshield here. The seeding is nice for important tournaments but here we have only several and in most of the tourneys we ahve good guys competing for the first place in the end anyway so the seeding would only discourage lesser gods from participating, and that's the least we want to accomplish, right?

    What is kind of weird is that in one of my spilt tourneys I'm with all the supposedly "bad" players and in the other group we have 4 1800 guys. In my group there's this guy of 1300 who was some time ago a 1950 player (help!! I need help!!!) so he'll probably kill us all off and then reach the winners group. I must admit that for split it would be preferable to have the better players divided over the two groups but for the rest I think random is fine unless we're talking about an important tourney, like the Championship, or a tourney where you can actually win something (yes I know it's rare but they do exist!).

    So, go Galaxy, go! You've got my support! 😀😀😀😀😀
  2. Canada
    23 Jan '05
    30 Jul '07 23:59
    I think what the random seating allows is for groups to have players of somewhat even strength fighting it out...Group 1 has three players of all somewhat even strength near 1800 fighting for number 1...while in group two three 1600 players battle it out for the top in the group...and I know it happens alot where this happens, i play in a ton of tourneys too. Just having one 1900 rated player in each group destroying the competition, with no one to harm him in his way to the second round kind off seems foolish...stick with the random system, and hopefully you get a good set up. Ive seen worse, ive seen Everyday once rated 2300 get a group of eight where his next opponent was 1400...it just happens...you just hope your on the good end 🙂
    04 Sep '04
    31 Jul '07 00:451 edit
    Originally posted by LekZ
    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...
    In Tournament 2010 group three the highest rated player has resigned all their games.

    Do the higher rated players really deserve to have an easy ride when they do this?

    There is always http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/threadlist.php?forumid=17 to put forward your ideas for better seeded tournaments.
  4. Standard memberAnzelak
    Sloth's First King
    Mansfield, England
    14 Jul '07
    01 Aug '07 15:06
    Ultimately, I cant see that it makes that much difference?

    But it is a good point. If you're the best in the tournament and you're going to win shouldn't difficulty increase gradually rather than be extremely difficult initially and a pushover thereafter.

    Introduce seeds if you like. That way, when a newb whips the person Seeded 1st and knocks him out in the first round... Everyone really can have a quiet giggle 🙂!
  5. Joined
    18 Jun '06
    02 Aug '07 17:59
    Seems like the higher rated guys don't fancy having people who can actually give them a game in the same group early on... I'm with Galaxyshield on this one too, you just have to beat whatever's in front of you - or in my case, lose early and lose often ;p
Back to Top
var g_isMobile = (window.innerWidth<1024); var g_boardPref = new CBoardPref('book', 'vinyard', 56, ! g_isMobile, (g_isMobile?20:5) ); var g_pullTimerId = 0;