U2000
If you may, it sounds like you are running away out of fear to losing to someone within your rating. Does a loss against an expert feel significantly less bad to a loss against a 1900?
If you want to be a master you have to beat u2000 consistently. It's better to deal with the problem now rather than later
+2
i don't think they would let me play in the Open section even if I really wanted to.
An Open section is, by definition, open to all. Did they call the top section something else?
I think there might be a floor. Anyhow, I don't really want to play in the Open Section because that would be even more difficult thatn U22
It's not an Open section, it's Premier. You'd have to be 1800+ if a junior and 2000+ otherwise.
Personally, since it seems you have a mixed (slightly negative) record against other A players, I'd choose U2000. If you want to play experts but have a terrible record against them, maybe just use local opportunities; it doesn't make sense to go into a U2200 section at a major tournament with virtually no confidence.
Though I'm interested as to what you think your problem is with experts, since you have a pretty solid record against 1900s but barely anything against 2000s. From my experience, it doesn't seem like there's a lot of difference between 1900s and 2000s besides the latter blundering slightly less and playing somewhat better under pressure.
Do the U2200 and learn many things, however only if you can manage to analyze even if you have lost all games in worst case scenario. Otherwise play U2000
Most of the events I played in while in Europe this was never a problem . " Open tournaments " were always one big section anyway and werent " class tournies " which is what more and more US swisses are becoming .
I am 17 years old, so technically a "junior" but no I won't play the Permier/Open
I recently got a new GM chess coach, so I'll ask him about his thoughts. @Reb I don't view it so much as a problem- I'd much rather play in "class tournies" than true opens
I think you've answered your own question.
From everything you've said about the premier section, you should definitely play in the U2000 section.
It doesn't make any sense to me why you think I should either play U2000 or Premier. Would you mind elaborating a bit?
I wish they had U2000 tourneys where I live. Every tournament is an Open over here. So enjoy the merrits of having tournaments which you can win once in a while... ;)
It all depends on your goals, but generally I recommend:
Play up in small tournaments
Play your rating level in big tournaments.
You'll get plenty of competition in your own section.
SmyslovFan has a good point. In the bigger tournaments, there are at least a half dozen people in each section who are severely underrated -- sometimes by as much as 200 points. Hence, you likely will be playing 2100/2200 level players in the U2000 section.
As pointed out earlier, which section you pick depends on your objective. If your objective is to pick up ratings points, then play U2000; if your objective is to play much stronger players, then play U2200. I have heard some folks theorize that your rating will increase much more by playing up since you pick up more points if there is a bigger ratings differential when you win. Of course, that assumes that you win. More likely, if you are facing players who are on average 300+ points higher than you, you will lose all or almost all of your matches, which will result in at least a small decline in your rating. The only way that you will actually win a majority of your games is if you yourself are underrated.
Your stats page on uschess.org indicates you should play the under 2000 section as you have a horrible record against players over 2000 .
I beg to differ. If you want to get any better, you should play one level above your comfort zone. If you regularly beat 1900s, have trouble against 2100s, and again against 2300s and 2500s. Don't play in an Open Section or Under 2400 Section, but stretch and play in the Under 2200.
You must go in though realizing that you are not in the running for money, and that if you score say, 2 or 2 1/2, you had a really good tournament.
Facing someone 200 points above you should result in a half a point per 2 games. Therefore, if you figure you will probably be near the bottom, hence facing near the mid-point, upper 2000s (probably below 2100), and you figure you'll probably average about 2050 for opponent's ratings, you should score roughly 1.5 out of 6. So consider 1 as not so good, 1.5 as par, and 2 or above as really good!
My chess coach advised me to play U2000, and given that there are other open tournaments coming up that are smaller than the National Chess Congress, I'll have plenty of opportunities to play U2200 in the future.
Your stats page on uschess.org indicates you should play the under 2000 section as you have a horrible record against players over 2000 .
I beg to differ. If you want to get any better, you should play one level above your comfort zone. If you regularly beat 1900s, have trouble against 2100s, and again against 2300s and 2500s. Don't play in an Open Section or Under 2400 Section, but stretch and play in the Under 2200.
You must go in though realizing that you are not in the running for money, and that if you score say, 2 or 2 1/2, you had a really good tournament.
Facing someone 200 points above you should result in a half a point per 2 games. Therefore, if you figure you will probably be near the bottom, hence facing near the mid-point, upper 2000s (probably below 2100), and you figure you'll probably average about 2050 for opponent's ratings, you should score roughly 1.5 out of 6. So consider 1 as not so good, 1.5 as par, and 2 or above as really good!
I didnt base my advice only on his record against players over 2000 but also on his record against his fellow A class players . In the last 12 months he has scored less than 50% against his peers , this indicates he can still learn from his fellow A class players while having a more realistic chance in every game than he would have playing up at this time . When you are trying to raise your rating it is more important that you consistently beat those lower than you and score better than 50% against your peers ... your rating will go up with this approach even if your score against experts and masters is bad . Ofcourse once he reaches 2000 he has to consistently beat A class players and lower class players while scoring at least 50% against his fellow 2000s . Dennis , whats holding your rating back most is the losses to 1500s and in the last 12 months you have a loss to an 1100 and a 1200 as well ... losing to players this much lower than you really keeps you back , you simply cannot lose to players several classes below you ...
@Reb Obviously. That sort of stuff shouldn't occur. And it's been a while since that's happened but I mean with all due respect, that in itself isn't such useful advice...it's almost like you're just telling me not to lose to certain players. To be fair, both of the Class D guys were very underrated and you can see it in their performances in those tournaments, but certainly I understand, I still don't have any business losing to those people. I don't really play Class D players anymore either because nowadays I don't play in scholastics and I focus more on Open tournaments where I don't get paired with people under 1700 very often. I mean it's clear I have a lot of work to do, and I guess for now I will stick to U2000, but I have a problem with people over 2000.
I had a game recently, against FM Larry Gilden in Virginia, where I got a totally winning position and he offered me a draw and I declined. But then in time trouble (i.e. less than twenty seconds) I threw it all away. So I did have one really good shot to beat a strong player.
Reb makes many good points in his post. I would look at that again, there is wisdom there.
I am believer that you have to beat the players 100 - 200 points beneath you with regularity before you can take a seat at the next table. Failing to do so, suggests a weakness in some facet of your play that might need to be addressed.
Answer depends on how you are feeling.
if you study enough and have confidence go 2200 and attack. keep in mind that the feeling of if having much better position but shaky play and losing advantage is painfull.
if you dont feel stable enough but shaky; afraid of losing; or you want to build confidence in yourself and stability go u2000 or u1900.
I often like to play lower rated than me, becouse i have holes in my game that winning positionally vs lower or equal rated often feels better than winning vs stronger opp who did a blunder or underrated you.
as someone typed you have to be able to beat 8/10 those bellow you, can you. can you hold a draw in sleighty worst position vs lower rated? do you have good technique with bishops knights in unballanced endings, all this will matter more and more when u go up in rating,