Is it better to be the Top seed in a tournament or the bottom seed in a tournament.

I am playing in the florida state championship this weekend, and i am currenty the top seed in the u1350 category, but i feel like i should switch to the u1600, so i ask, is being a top seed better or a bottom seed better?

Be the bottom seed and test your metal against the big dogs.

Depending how many play up you.ay not get may opponent's higher rated than you but you should at least get one or two

I always like to be near the bottom. There's a lot less risk, and I tend to overthink and blunder basically against lower-rated players.

Which one is better mostly just depends on you. Would you rather play for money or rating? If you have a bad day in the u1350 section, you'd have a much harder time gaining back the lost rating because you'd likely only be playing lower-rated players. In the u1600, you are unlikely to win money, but there's a lot less risk and probably a higher chance of winning rating.

Personally, I would choose the u1600 section, but it just depends on what you would rather play for.

The problem with being the bottom seed is you have a good chance to get a bye, including a first round bye. Happened to me the first and only time I ever played up (that I can remember).

I would prefer playing as the bottom seed, since there is much less stress about winning (I play up in pretty much all the tournaments I go to). When I play higher rated opponents, I know that I'm "supposed" to lose, which calms me down, and when I do win, I'm always surprised and very happy, which boosts my feelings for the next round

Like previous posts said I think being bottom is better for increasing rating but if you want to play for the prize pool play for a top seed.

all can be fun. i enjoy top, middle and bottom. top is nice because you are likely to win money and or win a lot of games if players arent massively underrated in your section, but it can be rah if you lose or draw to someone lower than you and lose rating points because of it while middle can be nice because you might get a shot at the money, probably will win a game and get opportunities at playing and beating higher rated players to get rating points while having lower rated ones you can play that will usually help to balance out your performance if you cant beat the top level guys, while the bottom is nice because the pressure is off and your unlikely to lose many points, while you get shots at gaining a bunch from beating folks higher up then you. you might get a bye in a round though which can suck/are unlikely to win back your entry fee unless you are very underrated, in which case you might be able to depending on how much you are and could potentially win a bigger prize because of it. not sure if you've hit 1400 but at 1330 if i hadn't hit that yet i'd probably try to play to get there, because once you hit it you get a 1200 floor instead of a 100 floor. by winning the top prize in certain tournaments under sections though you at least used to be able to get an automatic floor installed, have heard las vegas(?) at least used to do that, but not sure how many others do. world open(?) maybe.

The question is whether you prefer to win money or rating points. Most kids who I know want to see their rating increase and that seems easier when facing higher rated opponents. Hence the kids play up. Adults may see things differently.

As a kid, I agree

Other people have answered correctly that it's about what you value but once upon a time when I was 17 I was one of the top seeds in the Minnesota Bantam section (U1200) played some great games and tied for first with 5.5 / 6 qualifying me for the closed championship in said section. It's a great memory and I went home with money in my pocket.

As a TD I'll mention that being the top seed seems to carry a lot of risk and simply an early draw seems to discourage a lot of top seeds and they withdraw from the tournament once they feel their no longer in contention for the money (to be fair it usually means they're not playing well and they also don't want to lose more rating points). IMO it just points out how overly focused we as humans are on the result (Ratings! Yay!) rather than the act of struggling against an opponent.

edit: Playing the closed was even better than the open. I expected to spend tons of time watching Victor Adler and Sean Nagle's games and instead I was so hyperfocused on my games I went home mentally exhausted and completely content with my efforts.

You can avoid full point bye scenarios by scheduling a 1/2 point bye ahead of time. I wish I had considering how one tournament went for me. 4 round Swiss in two sections. I was the lowest player in the top section. It was a low rating cut off and I wasn't playing up. I got crushed by one of the better players in round 1, then got a second round bye because someone had taken a first round 1/2 point bye and now the field had an odd number. The TD couldn't find a house player for me to play an extra game so it was a long wait until round 3.

Being the top rated player in a section can be tough. Everybody is gunning for you and expects you to win the section, setting potentially unrealistic expectations for yourself. And although you might be the highest rated, I've noticed these days there is a high degree of variance in players of all ratings, so that if you have a tournament with a bunch of players rated between 1200 and 1400 the ratings aren't predictive - the 13XX players don't consistently beat the 12XX players and the results seem almost random compared to the ratings. I'd play up - knock off a couple of 1500's and you'll be there in no time.

play bottom seed, i remember my first nationals i was 1280 and instead of playing u1300 i played in u1600, and ended with 5/7 playing an against an average 1480 or something. I played up every round, and gained almost 200 rating points. I don't know how big your tournament is but in general you always want to play against higher rated players.

How certain is it that you would be the bottom seed in U1600? There will likely be others wanting to play up and if you would be top in U1350 that makes it a decent chance that others playing up will be lower rated than you, keeping you from getting a first round bye. If you get a first round one (feasible, as otherwise you wouldn't want to play up), then you probably won't have to worry about later round byes.

I played in a tournament with mostly higher rateds recently and drew four games, lost one, and won two recently. Playing up is what I would do

Neither answer is wrong. I have both been a top 3 seed and a bottom 3 seed. Being the top dog requires more mental energy and is a challenge I like to use to test my "champion's mentality". I like being a bottom seed as I feel like the plucky challenger fighting against a higher class of opponents, and the only pressure I feel is to play my best chess. I prefer to be in the middle though, feels "just right" LOL

final result: 3/6

What section?