Well said
Here is an answer
Sort:
Jun 4, 2022
0
#3
1. Defending World Champion is a tradition in regular chess: Magnus Carlsen vs. his challlenger. And even regardless of whether the W4PCC has this tradition, this tournament could be dragged out for months without very specific organization. Think about the doubles Teams W4PCC for example. 3-6 months since several teams each week seemed to fall weeks behind schedule.
2. More of the part that the test server had 59-day outdated archived data so no fair and accurate representation of the 2200+ players could be represented in an arena on the test server hence open to ALL. The other half of that is yes, let everyone have a chance and let’s see if the top players have a chance. I’ll explain that in #3. And since there has been so much negativity circulating around about how this game is supposedly dying… we needed a little action booster to start this thing anyways????? Also, Arena 4 was a fLuke of course 
it does however balance out Day 1, making all four time zones effectively the same format minus the incident we saw in the chat, in which I do once more need to emphasize: use of chat while playing is NOT allowed.
And 3. We gave everyone a chance. It goes to show that the better players are just going to handle it more and better over time a much larger percentage of the time. This is why a significant majority of repeats are happening this year vs. last year. Even the trolls are being weeded out quickly; the one event we all witnessed, a couple of those trolls didn’t even survive the opening. The people deserving of qualification are getting it; congratulations to those who qualified so far!
DEAR SIR AND FRIENDS,
I previously wrote one thing.if who is playing against who,it can be kept unknown,then the possibility of playing 2 players will be reduced.if I know whom I am facing in the next game and I contact him to play as a team,then other 2 players who are playing alone cannot do anything.If this can be done it will be very good.and if the last 16 players are supposed to play with randomly selected players,then it would be better.last year in all 5 games in 2nd round,I lost quickly as 2 opponents attacked me and my opposite side was inert.if it happened in 1 game,that was good.in all the 5 games it happened.but in qualifier arena ,my playing skill was not that bad in every game.
So,I request to consider my point and if my friends like this they can also vote on it.
Regards to admin and all my friends
My comment or opinion might seem irrelevant here but I won when players were unknown and not preselected.hence the comment is relevant.regards.
Jun 5, 2022
0
#6
"More of the part that the test server had 59-day outdated archived data so no fair and accurate representation of the 2200+ players could be represented in an arena on the test server hence open to ALL." : YES I thought of course about this one; (the only solution could be to install for instance a different threshold, for instance 1900, betting on the fact that it's unlikely that someone would have gained 300 points in 2 months time...). THE PROBLEM IS NOT about the 3 first qualifiers anyway. But about the 4th.
Jun 5, 2022
0
#7
"3. We gave everyone a chance." : for me it's a bad argument. Because 1° that is not what was decided initially and 2° 2 hours are NOT ENOUGH in order to make the results fully legitimate and statistically relevant. Once again, if you are stuck in high level long games and only manage to make 4 games, and win let's say 3 of them, another player with exactly the same level as you could have maybe play 7 games of which he won 5, of which 3 by mere luck, having a strong opp and 2 low level beginners as sides, and with wins in a row finishes 1st of the qualifier.
In addition, the overall format of the qualifiers does not guarantee the best players to qualify. We could effectively see last year that not all the leaders could qualify and that is not normal. Quite often the fact of being 1st rather than 2nd in an arena is only due to luck. That's why I still consider that you should've taken simply the first 3 or even 5 players of which arena, giving them for instance 15, 10, 7, 5, 3 pts or whatever, like in Formula 1, and then you calculate the points. That would've made the final results really honest, fair, relevant, with no luck involved.
Jun 5, 2022
0
#8
Indipendenza wrote:
"More of the part that the test server had 59-day outdated archived data so no fair and accurate representation of the 2200+ players could be represented in an arena on the test server hence open to ALL." : YES I thought of course about this one; (the only solution could be to install for instance a different threshold, for instance 1900, betting on the fact that it's unlikely that someone would have gained 300 points in 2 months time...). THE PROBLEM IS NOT about the 3 first qualifiers anyway. But about the 4th.
I managed to gain 1000 points in 1 week. 1500--> 2500.
if the arena was 2200+ i wouldn't be able to participate.
This is an answer(s) to any complaints about the first three qualifiers.
1. Luke couldn't postpone the qualifiers because he probably had already told @icystun that he would have the world championship cycle before icy went sailing. (June 26th or so). Would you rather have rojitto, Radon etc..., or the world champ himself.
2. Why were the qualifiers not 2200+? Maybe because Luke wanted to let the weaker players have a chance, to grow the playerbase. Or maybe he simply couldn't enforce a rating requirement on the test server, I don't know. But I think it was interesting and I personally found higher rated games easier to win.
3. All players that qualified in these arenas are as much qualified as anyone else who will qualify. They didn't cheat, hack or hypnotize. They simply played an arena that was setup by the director, and won.