Chess.com, please fix your arena kings format

Sort:
Avatar of rychessmaster1

I’m tired of 1100s winning while I get 2800s every other game

Avatar of yal_the_cat

first

Avatar of yal_the_cat

oof thats annoying

Avatar of TheShamelessFlagger

you  lost to a 1100?

Avatar of rychessmaster1
Ouuuuuh wrote:

you  lost to a 1100?

No the 1100s win because they only play other people under like 1300

Avatar of KingSonicTheChessHedgehog

i thought the great doesnt lose

Avatar of dah_happyh0ppyh0rsi3

yes thats kinda stupid

Avatar of SimonMTL

No, you have the wrong mentality. Arena pairings are based on ratings. Everyone has a roughly equal chance to win. Plus prizes are only for streamers so most of the "1100s" at the top aren't even eligible for anything.

Avatar of Crusader_For_Christ

Aren't you like ~2600 blitz? On average, you're not going to get paired with a 1300. . .

Avatar of isjatt

No I think he means people smurf

Avatar of SimonMTL

We're checking for that obviously... in several ways too. We close several people each AK for using alts and for sandbagging

Avatar of llama47

Ry's complaining that it's not based on skill. As @simonmtl said "everyone has a roughly equal chance to win"

Avatar of icyyyyspeed

in my opinion, it should work like OTB tournaments: people are paired by how many points they have, not by rating.

Obviously its your website so its your decision

Avatar of SimonMTL

Nope, it's specifically not supposed to favor higher rated players. They already have an advantage of having more people below them ratings wise so they have a higher chance to play down than up. That's basically the only edge they get. Otherwise, everyone is largely playing at their level

Avatar of NubbyCheeseking
SimonMTL wrote:

No, you have the wrong mentality. Arena pairings are based on ratings. Everyone has a roughly equal chance to win. Plus prizes are only for streamers so most of the "1100s" at the top aren't even eligible for anything.

So, if I underatand correctly 

1100s play 1100s and 2000s play 2000s.

If 2000s only play 2000s and 1100s only play 1100s, the 1100 can win despite being worse than the 2000, which shouldn't happen

Avatar of llama47

That's also the appeal of an arena format. Obviously something like a swiss pairing would have the lower rated players finish last every time... also meaning they lose almost all of their games every time.

Avatar of icyyyyspeed

As I said, it's your decision, but in my opinion the best player should win. Otherwise the pairing luck becomes way too important. I don't play arenas for the same reasons ry said, I would prefer if they had the same format as titled tuesday.

Thanks

Avatar of icyyyyspeed
llama47 wrote:

That's also the appeal of an arena format. Obviously something like a swiss pairing would have the lower rated players finish last every time... also meaning they lose almost all of their games every time.

yes but otherwise what exactly are you rewarding...luck of the pairings?

Avatar of SimonMTL

OK, we get the points you're making but again, the point of the arena format is to give everyone a chance to win. If we wanted only the best players to win, we'd run a 25 rounds swiss. If the format isn't suitable for you, you can choose not to play. If you like the idea, then we have a spot for you. We're rewarding consistency at your level. Is there some luck? sure. but that's not the deciding factor. And there is some luck in swisses too.

Avatar of icyyyyspeed

I understand where you're coming from, and I'm sure there are also many people who agree with you.

Have a good day happy.png