Unbandeds

Could we please have some unbanded tourneys? Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of bands, but not when it's all we have. Ones like sprint duels and splits and grand splits and grouped randoms were all very popular, and now we only have them in banded form. With all the talk lately about sandbagging and provisionals in bandeds, I would think there would be more normal tournaments out there.

I don't mean to complain. I just want to play random opponents again.

Originally posted by GalaxyShield
Could we [b]please have some unbanded tourneys? Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of bands, but not when it's all we have. Ones like sprint duels and splits and grand splits and grouped randoms were all very popular, and now we only have them in banded form. With all the talk lately about sandbagging and provisionals in bandeds, I would think there woul ...[text shortened]... rnaments out there.

I don't mean to complain. I just want to play random opponents again.[/b]

I just came here to ask the same thing!! 😀

You mean to tell me you're sick of playing the same 20 people over and over again?

Originally posted by zebano
You mean to tell me you're sick of playing the same 20 people over and over again?

Surprisingly yes. Especially when they're mostly 1900+.

Originally posted by GalaxyShield
Could we [b]please have some unbanded tourneys? Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of bands, but not when it's all we have.

I don't mean to complain. I just want to play random opponents again.[/b]

Tournaments created by demand... Thread 52938

D

I have been complaining about this for over a month.
Even cancelled my sub over this and admin refusing to even respond to this.
The main problem is that most Red Hot Pawn players are very weak and don't wany to study chess to improve. They are LAZY.
As a teacher, director and organizer in chess for almost 30 years I have listened to their complaints:
"I keep losing to strong players."
"It isn't fair that I have to play strong players."
"They are too strong a player, it just isn't fair."

WELL, BOO HOO.

A stronger player is a stronger player beause they STUDY HARD and WORK HARD at improving their game, Sometimes thousands of hours.

Apparently these weakie players are not too lazy to complain to Russ and Chris instead of actually studying chess.
Instead of simply creating SOME tourneys to accomodate these crybabies, admin has turned the entire Red Hot Pawn site into a pro-weak player site.
Anf they refuse repeatedly to even discuss this.

I hereby nominate Red Hot Pawn as the Top Gurly-Man Chess Site on the web.
(Arnie would probably agree)
Angela

Originally posted by Ragnorak
Tournaments created by demand... Thread 52938

D

I tried. Didn't work. That's why I haven't created a thread requesting tournaments in a long, long time. I send them direct.

Originally posted by GalaxyShield
I tried. Didn't work. That's why I haven't created a thread requesting tournaments in a long, long time. I send them direct.

What did you try, and what didn't work?

D

Originally posted by Ragnorak
What did you try, and what didn't work?

D

Oh, I didn't look far enough down your post in your thread. I didn't realize what you meant in here, I thought you meant sending in requests via feedback. Which I tried and didn't work when I requested unbanded tourneys. It normally does, but hasn't of late.

I do agree with your point. Your idea for a system would be helpful.

Originally posted by GalaxyShield
Could we [b]please have some unbanded tourneys? Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of bands, but not when it's all we have. Ones like sprint duels and splits and grand splits and grouped randoms were all very popular, and now we only have them in banded form. With all the talk lately about sandbagging and provisionals in bandeds, I would think there woul ...[text shortened]... rnaments out there.

I don't mean to complain. I just want to play random opponents again.[/b]

i agree, it would be nice to get pushed around by some 1700+ again.

the "Big Unbanded Quartets" format seemed to fill up well, several were made - then no more?

maybe they should have been just a little bigger ... 200 players perhaps.

Originally posted by trevor33
i agree, it would be nice to get pushed around by some 1700+ again.

I have the same chance of drawing a 2000+ in a unbanded tournament as you have of drawing someone of my rating. You have a good band to play in, while those who hit 1675+, even just for a short time, get stuck playing all the 17 18 1900 players for a month.

Originally posted by flexmore
the "Big Unbanded Quartets" format seemed to fill up well, several were made - then no more?

maybe they should have been just a little bigger ... 200 players perhaps.

They took long enough to fill up, though. Multiple weeks. I prefered the 64 entrant grouped randoms. They filled up and were created daily.

Originally posted by GalaxyShield
I have the same chance of drawing a 2000+ in a unbanded tournament as you have of drawing someone of my rating. You have a good band to play in, while those who hit 1675+, even just for a short time, get stuck playing all the 17 18 1900 players for a month.

i agree, its not fair for the 1700-1800 players but now will playing in an unbanded tournament make it any better? you're still going to be coming up against the 1700+ players in the later rounds.

but there should be more unbanded tournament.

Originally posted by trevor33
i agree, its not fair for the 1700-1800 players but now will playing in an unbanded tournament make it any better? you're still going to be coming up against the 1700+ players in the later rounds.

but there should be more unbanded tournament.

Yes, I know. But it gives a better variety of opponents, which is the real fun. The higher up you get, the thiner the list of people who are close to your rating, which means you're going to end up playing the same people over and over. Also, usually in each round, you'll get a couple games vs lower opponents and some vs higher, which makes it much easier to play in, rather than having to play hard every game to get a good score.