personally i think all the posts about cheating are a little silly...correct me if i'm wrong (i'm new to this tournament stuff) but isn't this for fun and enjoyment? ....if you have to "win" that bad that you cheat - that is really your personal problem but there are so many tournaments and games to be played here on chess.com (love it btw) that frankly who cares if someone cheats???

YES! Scored my sixth win!

someone can obviously improve in 3 yrs.

whats wrong with  the inflated rating at the end is the fact those players were very probably that strong at the beginning of the tournament even if their rating said they were not.

I wasn't inferring that people are cheating, or there is any unfairness, as we all know what the rules are before we enter a tourney and it's our choice to do so.

Having said that, I think a better way to organise tourneys which are rating range based might be to use some kind of easy to understand crude average, such as the mid-point between a players highest-ever rating, and their current rating. This wouldn't be perfect either, but would at least serve to reduce the number of players in each group that clearly were more than capable of footing it with players in the next group up.

Having said that, am enjoying the tourney (my first) and the challenge.

2 yrs is WAY TOO MUCH what's wrong with the inflated rating at the end?

chess.com have over 6 million members. surely a solution would be to say  you can't play in one of their tournaments  unless  you have been a member for at least ...   say  2 years. that would solve the strong newcomer problem at least.

well i agree i wouldnt get any satisfaction from doing that but apparently it does go on. baffling.

hmm..I think he might be cheating then.

Yes, I do believe you. I have seen it too, but also sometimes "only" around 2200.

well i know for   a fact the last six in one of these tournaments were all over 2400. one in fact was over 2600.

Maybe not 2400+. but definitely more than 1600-1800 and also 2000+. That problem cames because what you just said. I suggested some solutions to that problem in a post I wrote some months ago, but no one seems to believe they are good enough, as those improvements hasnt been implemented.

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/tournaments/over-rated-players

as i said somewhere else this tournament will eventually be won by someone rated above 2400. check previous tournaments.this is for one of 2 reasons, either the players have been deliberately manipulating their rating or they are fairly new to chess.com and still on the up and up. either way its not very fair to players who are geninuely rated 1600-1800 like me.

Quite a few players seem to already have ratings up towards 1900 or even 2000 after only one round. Will be very challenging for those of us with a highest ever rating less than 1800.

yes, it goes to the second player. Don't withdraw, play on!

Question for tournament experts - I won my group...if i withdraw does advancement default to the second place in my group??? I ask because i don;t think i will be able to devote the appropriate time to play and analysis int he next round

yes! Scored my fifth win!

could be, but most of them are ridiculous and I always play my opening faster.

 i read somewhere that after   the first 4 moves by both players there are 4 BILLION  different possible positions  can that possibly be true?

I don't think it is possible to think through all legal moves for three moves in every situation. If we estimate ~20 legal moves in an average non-forcing position, then to consider 3 moves for both players would require considering ~20^6=64000000 positions. 

In long games, I may be able to consider all my legal moves and all my opponents legal responses. This is ~20^2=400 positions. In live chess, I would have a hard time considering all these as well.