In many matches our < 1400 players get sidelined. If any group (with at least 100 members) challenges Team India with following specs, it will always be accepted:

Rating: < 1400
Players: 3-6 (6 is preferred - we usually prefer not to play small matches, but this is special case)
Auto Start: Yes (minimises admin work)
Simultaneous games: Any (2 is preferred)
Day/Move: Any (but 1 is preferred as these players are usually young and keen to play fast)

Edit: Please name matches as "X vs. Team India < 1400" (where X is your group's name). Thanks.
Addendum: Added the minimum group size condition on 22/10/2011 to avoid impractical challenges.

Not so long ago, I saw same thing,not sure where and I challenged India couple times with diffirent teams and every challenge is canceled by team India !?

I am working ( and blackfirestorm666) on creating/reactivating  national (''old'') new teams,trying to find admin's  and get them active and possible involve in Leagues and tournaments.So...''always will be accepted'' not sure.

Sending again,just give them little time,they are new,young teams.

ACCEPTED, Team Ukraine's challenges been couple times rejected (5 players, 3 days move, rating range etc.)

think twice before typing

@M0oo9 and @adriano81: Were those challenges which were rejected, for < 1400 rating players? Although it might have happened, it is unlikely as we usually starve for matches for these players. Even if it happened, please look at this post as "from now on...unless we are overwhelmed by challenges (which again is unlikely)".

For other ratings, we do reject challenges just as our challenges are rejected by other groups - and we shall continue to do so. We have our reasons, just as others have theirs and I feel one shouldn't take it to heart. All admins try to make decisions that they feel are in the best interest of their group.

I sent challenges before 20 min.under 1400  ?

 Thanks! Next time, can you make them auto start too, it simply reduced admin work. Our (I mean Team India's) main aim is to give these players some matches to play. Thanks again for the challenges.

I didn't becouse I will try invite as much as possible,still have to send them pvt msg to join.

Dear Skand, I just sent our challenge to your Team (2 days per move, 6 players, under 1400).... hope you accept it as well

Personally I hate autostart matches

I too am not a fan of auto-start, except in case of below 1300 (extended to 1400), where the most important thing is to provide the members with games - winning/losing is secondary.

- There are many unrated players in this bracket who would like to quickly get some rating.

- There are many unrated players who will expose themselves as time-out losers

- There are many members who are pushed down in registered list and do not get a game

With these auto-start matches for < 1400 players we achieve many things without loading the admins with the additional work of following up to start the matches.

Then get them playing "normal" games not team games because how fair is it that A LOT of 1200 players are in fact normally WELL above that RL rating? I refuse to play "new players" in team matches untill they have played at LEAST 5-10 games so that I have a clear indication as to their normal rating.

Several points come to mind:

1. The 'unfairness' gets evened out between two teams  - you win some, you lose some.

2. If chess.com site allows unrated players to join team matches, then I am not going to think too much about it.

3. My main concern is to give these players games to play under my group. Not all < 1400 players are unrated.

Sure they could play 'normal' games, everyone can, but they joined my group and I see it as my responsibility to provide them with games under my group if I observe that time and again that they are deprived of team matches due to their lower rating. I would like to do something for them. All members deserve attention of admins.

These are just my thoughts. Naturally, there will be different views about these matters from different people.

Oh yes I completely understand and I HAVE raised this issue with chess.com making the suggestion that they put a setting in place to prevent players not being able to join team matches till 10 rated games are completed.

They have that option available when creating tournaments so it wouldn't be so hard to apply it to team matches too.

Yes, I too have made this suggestion. I have also requested if 'recent' time-out losers' could be filtered. The 'recent' could be a variable.

100% agree

Well online profiles show the loss % of time forfeits in the last 90 days doesn't it?

 Yes, it does. But consider:

1. In a 30 players a side, you checking every player's on-line profile! And there is not just one match to check!!

2. A player who lost 20 games on time 80 days back because she had to rush to her mother-in-law who fell down the staircase, may be in perfectly good position to play today. Whereas, if I lost a game on time yesterday because I had to fly to Mount Everest to rescue a lady in distress, I am surely a candidate to be filtered out of a match starting tomorrow. As an admin, I would like to have tools which I can use according to situations.

@M0oo9: Not even one player from your side has joined in the three challenges that you sent (Bhutan, Fiji and Samoa). Obviously if it continues this way we will cancel such matches and reject challenges from these groups next time. My invitation for challenges is a serious attempt to get matches for my members. It is not a joke.

You have to consider those are new teams and you need to give them little time,what's the cost ? They still have no idea what's going on on this site,and the matches I started for them I had to invite them one-by-one.

In activity like this,for me there is no place for jokes you talking about.

I am just working hard and spending too much time to get as much as possible national teams and members from around the world to join and play in tournaments like WL,AL etc.

If you are not supporting what I am doing then feel free and cancel,there are more teams and members who understand and support this work.

In this matter,I just trying to help your team and specialy this new teams.

While I appreciate what you are trying to do for these national teams, you must also appreciate that challenges that result in zero response from the challenger side show a casual approach from their side.

If you tell us in advance that you want us to support a group and keep a <1400 match open for long time, we will do it, one group at a time. But we definitely do not want to be challenged by innumerable groups who after challenging us, have nothing to show.

We want these matches (<1400) to start fast and end fast. That is the reason I have given specs of Auto-Start, 3-6 players, 2 simultaneous games and 1 day/move preference.