![]()
2200s BAD
To be fair, my elo is probably past that...
but I don't really play rapid ffa (except when I had more time and was a total noob)
As LazyImp wrote, rated game is the solution.
Could be, the problem is that some ppl have nothing to lose, rating is recoverable.
Could be, the problem is that some ppl have nothing to lose, rating is recoverable.
The tournament was made unrated because a lot of players care a lot (way too much?) about their rating. I guess rated games won’t solve all the issues, but at least reduce the occurence of those events. The nature of « solo » game itself make the game more dependant of the chance than let say a team game. The reallity is that if people wants to ruin a game in solo, they can and it’s hard to do something about it.
Could be, the problem is that some ppl have nothing to lose, rating is recoverable.
The tournament was made unrated because a lot of players care a lot (way too much?) about their rating.
Really, did people really want the world championship to be unrated because they fear their rating will drop ? Explains why these ppl act like they have Carlsen's rating
Otherwise their is no valid reason to make it unrated. People often play weirdly when the game is unrrated no matter which game it is. I’ve read several comments some weeks ago that some higher rated player didn’t wan’t to lose points to low rated players. Also, the fact that some low rated players were in made the outcome less predictable.
Otherwise their is no valid reason to make it unrated. People often play weirdly when the game is unrrated no matter which game it is. I’ve read several comments some weeks ago that some higher rated player didn’t wan’t to lose points to low rated players. Also, the fact that some low rated players were in made the outcome less predictable.
That's how chess tournaments work. Imagine the 2700s+ regular chess players asking for the tournaments they play in to be unrated. That's how ridiculous this sounds
As far as I know, top regular chess players also avoid to play in open tournaments where they could lose too many ratings points. Those 2700+ ratings are super important as it help them get invitations for some closed tournaments with interesting money prices.
As LazyImp wrote, rated game is the solution.
Did you read my post? It was pretty long, yet I clearly remember saying that the arena system has multiple systemic issues. I also remember saying that those issues make the arena system as a whole irredeemable in terms of a qualifying system, regardless of the changes made to it.
As far as I know, top regular chess players also avoid to play in open tournaments where they could lose too many ratings points. Those 2700+ ratings are super important as it help them get invitations for some closed tournaments with interesting money prices.
Ding just played a in a tournament that's full of regular GMs. You cant just play in a +-25 like
@LazyImp lol. Yes read it. I agree I only take a small portion of your whole argument. I had no intention of reducing your post to this point. I agree the whole Arena system is flawed, but it takes volonteers to make it work differently I guess. My point is that if you have rating point on the line you are much less likely to resgin too early or to behave in a way to ruin the game for a player on purpose. A 2 hours arena with a 50+ minute long game doesn’t make sense, but it doesn’t change the fact that people are more likely to throw the game if it’s not rated as they care less.
Ding just played a in a tournament that's full of regular GMs. You cant just play in a +-25 like
Well, if you’re talking about the need to qualify for the candidate tournament by playing a minimum of FIDE rated games, you know these are some specials circomstances. It doesn’t change the fact that the absolute best players avoid events where they could lose their rating/raking for insufficient benefit.
To be fair, I should also add that the server had some disconnections issues when the decision was made for unrated.
@LazyImp lol. Yes read it. I agree I only take a small portion of your whole argument. I had no intention of reducing your post to this point. I agree the whole Arena system is flawed, but it takes volonteers to make it work differently I guess. My point is that if you have rating point on the line you are much less likely to resgin too early or to behave in a way to ruin the game for a player on purpose. A 2 hours arena with a 50+ minute long game doesn’t make sense, but it doesn’t change the fact that people are more likely to throw the game if it’s not rated as they care less.
Yes but this doesn't solve other issues, such as random pairings giving some players a much easier path to qualify than others. There are always 3+ people in an arena with enough skill to win the arena. Each arena seems to have the feel of everyone who has some skill spinning a slot machine until they qualify.
@LazyImp I totally agree with you. I never have been a fan of arenas for qualifications. It’s good mainly to reduce the organizers workload.
As LazyImp wrote, rated game is the solution.
Well if qualifiers are rated and open for 2200s they cost extremely much elo...
I was happy that they were not rated this year because last year's qualifiers cost me around 200 elo. If the minimum elo were higher e.g. 2500 elo I would like rated qualifiers.
2200s BAD, me 2500/2600 after 3000+ games GOOD, now Im going to bongcloud, sac a piece and resign at move 3, ragequit cause I blundered 1 of my 3 queens, or even better, sac everything on my side cause the top player has a streak that I can't match so why not destroy a random player's hope.
Don't blame me, even if I, the 2500 genius, don't ruin the arena, the 2200s will ruin it.