Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Tournaments Forum

Tournaments Forum

  1. 30 Jul '18 13:40 / 1 edit
    Last year there was some discussion about setting upper rating limits for tournaments, say from 1645 and up. For a time it seemed there were tighter rating limit bands, but now it seems we are back to what it was before. How is having a 2500 player enter a tournament of players in the 1600 -- 2000 range fair? This is frustrating as the individual in question comes in at the last minute after most of a section has been filled. Aren't there tournament sections for players over, say 2200 to compete in and keep them out of sections designed for players with lower ratings.
  2. 30 Jul '18 16:12 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by @pzn2pawn
    Last year there was some discussion about setting upper rating limits for tournaments, say from 1645 and up. For a time it seemed there were tighter rating limit bands, but now it seems we are back to what it was before. How is having a 2500 player enter a tournament of players in the 1600 -- 2000 range fair? This is frustrating as the individual in questi ...[text shortened]... r, say 2200 to compete in and keep them out of sections designed for players with lower ratings.
    There isn't enough 2200+ players to fill up a band of their own. There are only about 8000 active users on the site, 61 are 2200+. There's 220 over 2000 and most play slow, with the majority of them having less than 10,000 moves played. The overall player base has been declining over the last few years. The bands need to be around 1700+ in order for the tournament to fill up in a reasonable time, there simply isn't enough strong players to justify upping the band limit.

    See it as a challenge, you get to play with the big boys, don't be such a chicken.
  3. 30 Jul '18 18:18
    There should be both, some banded tournaments 1700-2000 and some 1700+. Maybe less tournament choices and more banding options. Do we really need duels, threesomes, quartets, quintets and octets.....
  4. 30 Jul '18 19:25
    I am sorry to hear that the subscriber base is down. I wonder whether this is a general demographics issue or something else. Your comment about cowardice is uncalled for.The purpose of "ratings" is so that we can compete against players of roughly equal strength in class tournaments. At local tournaments there are "class" events, and "open" events. I like playing both and I welcome the opportunity occasionally to play players up to about 2200, but beyond that, I might as well fire up shredder or Houdini and have a go at them on my desktop. It would still seem there enough strong players on this site who could compete among themselves.
  5. Subscriber 64squaresofpain On Vacation
    The drunk knight
    30 Jul '18 19:25
    These "Big Boys" as Knightstalker puts it keep waiting for tournaments to nearly fill up then jump in at the last minute,
    making it too late for others to drop out and claiming yet another easy tournament win
    as they are rated minimum 200 points above the rest of the field.

    The state of the tournaments on this site is a joke, it's why I have joined other sites, purely for their tournaments.

    I have no intention of leaving this site though, mainly for the clan...
    and that's another joke for another comedy show ENTIRELY!
  6. 03 Aug '18 09:34
    I just checked...
    There are ten banded tournaments available for me to enter.
    In each and every one of these banded tournaments I could potentially find myself playing opponents up to 800 rating points higher than myself.
    Hardly a level playing field, and not what I want or expect from a banded tournament.
    One of these tournaments is 1620+ . Surely that's way too low for the top end?
    I do understand that it is tricky to get the balance right - introduce 2000+ tournaments at the top end, and it may never fill, or at least take a long time to fill, because of the shortage of players entering tournaments who are 2000+.
    But as it stands, I suspect there may be a whole lot of players 1700-2000 who choose not to enter these 1700+ banded tournaments, because they are not interested in getting beaten up by opponents (computers?) rated many points higher than they are.
    Ironically, this may mean the top rated tournaments take even longer to fill up, thus fuelling the problem!
    There is no easy solution, but how about at least trying some 1700-2000 tournaments?
    If it works, it works... and if it doesn't, well then can look for another solution.
    As it stands, players rated 1700-2000 looking to play tournaments against players of equal strength are being completely frozen out.
  7. 04 Aug '18 22:20
    This was exactly my point and your solution is an excellent one. I should point out there is one high rated player in particular who enters nearly every one of these tournaments, often dropping in at the last moment before other entrants can withdraw. I won't mention any names, but his average opponent rating is about 800 points lower than his. He has every right to enter all these tournaments as it is within the rules as presently structured -- I can't imagine what ego boost he gets from beating all these much lower rated opponents -- but this illustrates the flaw in the way tournaments are currently structured for people on the lower end of the cusp. I applaud the solution of 1700-2000 rating groups, or even 1600 -- 2100, if that would facilitate the process.