Hi Russ,
2 parts to this post...
Firstly, I'm waiting patiently for a tournie for lower intermediate players with a rating of...let's say between 1201 and 1400...anything on the horizon?
Secondly, an idea for an open tournie, where everyone has a good chance to progress to latter rounds...
Howabout 1st round groups according to rating...
EXAMPLE
Group 1 <=1000
Group 2 1001-1200
Group 3 1201 - 1300
Group 4 1301 - 1400
Group 5 1401 - 1500
Group 6 1501 - 1600
Group 7 1601 - 1800
Group 8 >=1801
Perhaps 8 players to each group, then winners go through to make a final group of 8.
This way eveyone - including novices - can compete in a tournament, and everyone has a real fighting chance of making the final group?
Anyone else find this idea appealing?
Warm regards to all,
Mark
Originally posted by MeesyI think that is a very good idea ...
Hi Russ,
2 parts to this post...
Firstly, I'm waiting patiently for a tournie for lower intermediate players with a rating of...let's say between 1201 and 1400...anything on the horizon?
Secondly, an idea for an open tournie, wher ...[text shortened]... else find this idea appealing?
Warm regards to all,
Mark
Originally posted by Meesyi think you mean that the lowest rated 8 go all the same group, then the next 8 etc.
an idea for an open tournie, where everyone has a good chance to progress to latter rounds...
Howabout 1st round groups according to rating...
EXAMPLE
Group 1 <=1000
Group 2 1001-1200
Group 3 1201 - 1300
Group 4 1301 - 1400
Group 5 ...[text shortened]... to each group, then winners go through to make a final group of 8.
this could most appropriately be implemented as an alternative to the original and random options.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
i believe it convenient for the strongest player also, they get to play the other strongest players at the time they sign up for the tournament, when they are most ready for it.
BUT BUT BUT BUT BUT BUT there will be examples of the top player getting timed out in the second round, then a player probably weaker than the 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th and 8 th seeds will win.
Originally posted by flexmoreIn case of the time-out in round 2 - Wouldn't that make it even more exiting for 'weaker' players ?
i think you mean that the lowest rated 8 go all the same group, then the next 8 etc.
this could most appropriately be implemented as an alternative to the original and random options.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
i believe it convenient for the strongest player also, they get to play the other strongest players at the time they ...[text shortened]... round, then a player probably weaker than the 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th and 8 th seeds will win.
Regards
The Slow Pawn
Originally posted by The Slow Pawnthe scenario i envisaged was if all the seeds win their groups in round 1.
In case of the time-out in round 2 - Wouldn't that make it even more exiting for 'weaker' players ?
Regards
The Slow Pawn
so now in round 2 we have seeds 1, 9, 17, 25, 33, 41, 49 and 57
if the top seeds now times out then we have the 9th seed probably winning the tournament - or maybe the 17 th!
how will seeds 2,3,4,5,6,7 feel about this?
this looks like an entering for "weaker" players to me.
perhaps you mean "exciting" ...... then yes.
but it is a very hollow victory, better are the rating limited tournaments.