Chess is to automatic? The higher rated wins in 99,99 % of the times.

I would love more tournaments with +/- 25-50 ratingspoints.

When you see the results of tournaments with 1200 vs. 1400... there's no discussion. You should just resign the game before it starts, because you know a 1200 can never beat a 1400.

It's in some way sad that chess is so automatic that you can predict the result before the game starts just by looking at the players rating.

You never learn to be better at chess if you always lose against better players. What do you think about meeting higher rated players? I resign from those game before they starts.

A 1200 can beat a 1400 but of course the 1400 is favourite to win. I like the idea of very close rating pools for tournaments... You resign before playing? I mean, that's just a pathetic attitude. If you think 100% you will lose then you probably will - but is it not a free hit? You can do whatever you want, try that crazy sacrifice or a weird opening or whatever. You have nothing to lose. 

200 rating difference is 75% scores only. It means 1200 vs 1400 will end as 1 : 3 score.

99% against 800 elo difference

99.9 % against 1200 elo diffence

99.99% against 1600 elo difference

99.999% -----> {1600+400}=2000 

and so on, 

eg, If you are 1200, and you pair against 2000, your winning chance is only 1% ( excluding draws) , and the chance of 400 rated player winning against 2800 Magnus become 1 in million chance.

https://www.3dkingdoms.com/chess/elo.htm 

Certainly in your dreams 

My dream is to win against higher rated players.

How are you going to do that if you resign before the game starts? 

I think the only way to improve your rating is to play lower-rated players and beat them, then you get maybe +1 or +2 in rating points, and then just carry on. In a 100-200 games you will have maybe 200 higher rating.

Grow a set. 

The way to improve your rating is by learning to play better chess. Games against players rated 200 points higher are an excellent learning opportunity. Sure, you'll probably lose, but you'll also have some ideas about how they beat you. You can use those ideas to play better in the future. If you play against lower-rated players, you also have to avoid draws to increase your rating. Winning a hundred times in a row is actually quite a challenge.

Op is taking a safe approach and this is the best way to increase the rating without hard work. Am I missing something?

Absolutely not true. The way the rating formulas work, a 200 rating point difference gives the higher rates player 75% chance of winning. That means the lower rates would be expected to win one in four games. Hang in there, playing higher rated players and learning from your losses is one of the ways you get better.

You talking about a bishop pair? 🤣

Nice! 

The rating system is designed to make it so that there's no safe approach to increase rating without hard work. Playing against lower-rated players isn't a guaranteed way of increasing your rating. The larger the rating gap, the more rating points you lose when you don't win (including draws). To increase rating points by playing against low-rated players, you have to be especially good at beating them. Risk is still involved. And playing a hundred games is a decent amount of work, even against low-rated opponents. 

Perhaps most importantly, even if this does work, it's likely to lead to frustration as soon as OP plays anyone of similar rating. If they manage to increase their rating from 1200 to 1400 by playing weak opponents, they'll have gotten very good at playing against those opponents. They won't have gained any experience playing against 1400 rated players, so they're likely to lose many games against them (as well as rating points).

Op is just too scared. He need to visit a psychologist and check his blood pressure. 

It's funny theres no sports bet on chess games in my country, maybe because they know its a 1:1 odds of the higher rated to wins, and its guarantee to lose money to bettors if they even place 1,01 in odds, because chess must actually be the most automatic sport ever.

Ok. This statement your making is absolutely ridiculous. My rating is around a shy 1700-1750, and I have beaten players rated over 2300. Look in my archive if you don't believe me; I have also lost to players 1200. Probably even as low as 900. It is not as hard as you say to lose or win to someone rated higher than or lower than you. One other thing is that I am just as human as a player rated 1100, and vice versa, a player rated 2300 is just as human as me. Hopefully. So no matter how much higher or lower your opponent's rating there still gonna mess up sometimes. 

In my country there is no betting on chess games because i think the companys know how automatic the game is: the higher rated' odds for winning is like 1,01.

How can i ask chess.com to have more equal tournaments so i actually can, WIN AND LEARNS chess? More like +/- 3 or 5 rating points?

If rating doesnt matter to anyone of you. Let me ask this: why do i only lose against higher rateds? :-) :-) :-)

You must be a Very Good for never losing to lower rated people. If You keep up like that you might reach an expert rating

I have won players with 2200 elo and I have lost from players with 800 elo.