Basic members can play 3 live chess tournaments per week now instead of 2
Live Tournaments Now in Public Beta! What do you think?
Maybe this has been discussed in another topic, but it would be nice if, for a given time choice, the two kinds of tournament began at a different time
(for example, for 5' games, :40 for opens and :25 for closed)
Maybe this has been discussed in another topic, but it would be nice if, for a given time choice, the two kinds of tournament began at a different time
(for example, for 5' games, :40 for opens and :25 for closed)
I tend to agree - except up till now we've been using the Open sections as fall-back when a given rated section gets cancelled due to insufficient registrants.
2 Suggestions.
1. With the new abort system, to protect players from run-aways. It's very annoying when you are playing your friend and he is thinking hard on a move, and then the game gets aborted. I think that instead of automatically aborting it, give the user the option to maintain the game or abort it, that way your games don't get lost.
2. I have alot of friends that are interested in playing me in chess, but for some reason they are to impatient to sign up & verify an email, so I suggest the ability to invite anonymous people to a live chess game, and if they like the website they will sign up, so... more signups!
Thanks.
Actually, we're working now on making it possible to people to play more quickly - deferring the email validation step until later if they like. Accounts with un-validated email addresses can play games, etc., but will have no "voice" - no chat, no posts (forums, blogs) of any kind, etc.
I wonder if most beginning players really understand how the Swiss system works. I've played in a couple of 1200-1600 Standard tournaments so far (at least one of which had mutated into an Open format) and the "normal" behavior seems to be that people drop out after they lose their first two games or see/feel that they no longer have a chance at a medal. So in the last rounds, you are typically left with the higher ranked players who have won all their games and hopefully a couple of stalwarts who play all their games no matter what to match them up against.
This unfortunately does not lead to the normal flow for losers where you theoretically get to play an easier opponent following each loss. I think losers are jumping ship to play in the next tournament instead. Which doesn't make sense really. Is perhaps a bit of education required to maybe encourage people to stay in even when things are going badly (If rating is <1200 or so, post something like "Hey, If you keep playing you'll get an easier opponent next round!!!" ) ?
If someone voluntarily quits a tournament, prevent them from joining another tourney on the same day. An easy fix, no?
I like that "fix" actually.
Played in a standard tourny last night, and there seemed to be a lot less drop-outs this time around - eight of us played the 5th round - but out of 23 starters. There's still something off. Either people are dropping on purpose or they know ahead of time they won't be able to play the whole thing but start anyways to get a few games in.
When you have completed your final game in a tournament, you can't join another tournament until all the other games in the first tournament have finished. Is there any reason for this?
I wonder if most beginning players really understand how the Swiss system works. I've played in a couple of 1200-1600 Standard tournaments so far (at least one of which had mutated into an Open format) and the "normal" behavior seems to be that people drop out after they lose their first two games or see/feel that they no longer have a chance at a medal. So in the last rounds, you are typically left with the higher ranked players who have won all their games and hopefully a couple of stalwarts who play all their games no matter what to match them up against.
This unfortunately does not lead to the normal flow for losers where you theoretically get to play an easier opponent following each loss. I think losers are jumping ship to play in the next tournament instead. Which doesn't make sense really. Is perhaps a bit of education required to maybe encourage people to stay in even when things are going badly (If rating is <1200 or so, post something like "Hey, If you keep playing you'll get an easier opponent next round!!!" ) ?
This is an important point. Believe it or not for me some of my most pleasing touranments have been Swiss touranments where I have lost the opening match or maybe even opening two matches, but have then gone on to win every other match in the tournament which means whilst I didn't win the tournament I have finished high up in the rankings, often finishing ahead of my opponents in the first match that I lost!
Is there anyway in which you can see tournament stats for tournaments you have recently completed?
Not yet. The plan is that we will add Tournament pages to the main site to show all of your past Live tournaments - similar to the existing pages for turn-based chess tourneys. (Sorry, no exact ETA just yet; we have a few other irons in the fire to deal with first.)
When we add those pages, all of your history will be available, including stuff that's taken place up till now.
Also would it be possible to choose which game we could watch, if we have already completed our game in the round, rather than just the top game?
I think is missing some middle way for the time control in tournaments, such as 4+7 or 5+10.
15+10 is really long and 10+0 is not incremental.
I was actually hoping to have one longer control in there than what we have now. 15/10 is pretty fast if you do most of your practice games at slower controls. I'm training at 15/10 now and It's fine for open games with lots of early captures, but in a closed position that's complex I find 15/10 tough. 30/g might be interesting!
I was actually hoping to have one longer control in there than what we have now. 15/10 is pretty fast if you do most of your practice games at slower controls. I'm training at 15/10 now and It's fine for open games with lots of early captures, but in a closed position that's complex I find 15/10 tough. 30/g might be interesting!
Maybe they should, but only if each round will be played on different days. Otherwise G/30 tournaments probably would not last over 2 rounds. It takes more time than some people can afford (most will probably quit after the 1st round).
I hope we'll have tournaments with tight rating sections soon. For now, we don't have enough players in tournaments even though we have only 3 rating sections (<1200, 1200-1599, 1600+), so we cannot add more sections yet. Cheers!
If you want more players, why not try let free members have more tournaments to play, say 5 games per week instead of the 2 games per week currently.