18231 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
I scan for a tournament to join, based on time and rating. I find one that has ratings in a certain range, and join it. When I view the "Standings" prior to the tournament beginning, I see a list of participants with ratings appropriately within the range for the tournament. However, when the tournament starts, there are several "new" participants and they all have HUGE ratings. It happens all the time, and it is making me avoid tournaments since I don't want to play someone that is going to pounce on me. SOmeone better will help, someone who doesn't even compare in ability, is just a waste of time.
What 'rating range' for the event (I'm only seeing rating ranges going down to 1400, or are you thinking OPEN, where anyone may join)?
What were the ratings of the several "new" participants with HUGE ratings.
It seems that when there are too few participants in a rating-limited tournament they are merged into the open tournaments instead. If you look at the tournament tab, the name will have changed to OPEN instead of the rating range.
Thanks chrka, that would make sense with the tournaments where I have seen this.
@sftac, the tournament description indicates <1000. Once the tournament starts there are players with a range of ratings - as high as 1650.
If chrka is right, then what is the point of having a rating limit defined prior to the tournament starting? It would be better if the tournament could be merged between different time definitions, rather than differen ratings, if there even needs to be a merge at all. In the cases I've seen there were 3, 4, or 5 players within the appropriate rating range, and the others were added in? Why not just conduct the tournament with 3, 4, or 5 people without adding any players that none of them wanted to play with?
Well, thankfully as a Diamond member, you can 'withdraw' once the event starts if you're dissatisfied and have unlimited capability to re-enter other tournaments (unlike the other member categories).
Given a choice: it's sounding like you'd rather a tournament not start, then to default to OPEN when participation as originally described is insufficient. Correct?
Maybe you could do that yourself, if you watch the tourney description closely and it changes its display to OPEN, say, 60 seconds before scheduled start, or at the scheduled start time.
Or, would you rather the start time be "soft" and delayed until enough entrants have entered? At some point the earlier entrants will leave in frustration, though, as it's nice to have an event starting at a known time.
There does not seem to be a 'tournament director', the process seems to be fully automatic.
I've seen this a few times also, but generally do not mind playing up.
I've had the opposite problem. I entered an 1800+ tournment, and when it started, there was me at 2000 and the second highest rated player was 1300.
Also, how does it decide the rankings if two players have the same score?
I still do not get why the tournament needs to have a minimum number of people. If only a few signed up, then kick the thing off with those people. No need to wait for more, risking drop outs. I'd rather have a tournament of three people where I know the ranking ahead of time, than 10 people in an open tournament that was not advertised as open. Once people have signed up for a tournament, the structure of the tournament definition should not change.
A tournament needs to end up with three results (1st, 2nd, 3rd).
For Swiss Style, that usually means a minimum of four entrants and it's typically a requirement that at least three of the entrants have a non-zero end result.
The site's guidelines were no doubt set accordingly. Still, Live Chess tournaments are brand new here (the graphics display of games/standings is woefully inadequent just now). I expect there will be many revisions and additions before the end result is satisfactory for most participants.
tournament games somtimes result in a draw
Chessbazaar's Dubrovnik 4" crimson problem?
by htdavidht 2 minutes ago
Analyzing games from a certain position
by notmtwain 4 minutes ago
What would be the rating of a top chess player in the late 1800s today
by patzermike 4 minutes ago
by player83782226 5 minutes ago
Ponziani Opening Forced Exchange Questions
by cornbeefhashvili 5 minutes ago
losing on time
by Unkn0wnn 9 minutes ago
2/28/2015 - Maister - Grozdov, corr. 1954
by MSC157 10 minutes ago
The Petroff Defence. Your Thoughts.
by TheProfessor101 10 minutes ago
Custom Set From Chess Bazaar
by FrankHelwig 14 minutes ago
Longest Bullet Game in History?
by notmtwain 23 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2015 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!