This is one of the reasons why i paid to be member.
free members should be allowed to join more than 1 tournament at a time
Sort:
Eo____ wrote:
I just finished looking at the tournaments list and couldn't find a single upcoming tournament that has enough people signed up for it. Allowing free members to join more than one tournament at a time might actually make tournaments more enjoyable for all those interested in being participants.
...and less inclined to pony up the dough.
SerbianChessStar wrote:
This is one of the reasons why i paid to be member.
But if not enough people sign up for tournaments then you are not really enjoying a lot of premium benefits as far as tournaments are concerned.
yea same here i am with you. there are no many people playing tournaments THATS WHY!
Candy_Dreams wrote:
yea same here i am with you. there are no many people playing tournaments THATS WHY!
There are 3,717 tournaments in progress, as we speak. Maybe the paying members have reached saturation point?
I've said before: maybe open tourneys that are struggling to fill up, for free members, instead of deleting them.
For example, if after 90 days a tournament has 50 out of 100 players, just open up that one for all. Maybe the TD can or should have the option of disabling this feature.
I would support giving free members three tournaments instead of the one they now enjoy.
there aren't enough Ferrari's on the road, so I would like one for free.
oneshotveth wrote:
there aren't enough Ferrari's on the road, so I would like one for free.
The point of allowing more people to join tournaments is to allow everyone, premium and free members, but especially premium members, the opportunity to play in more tournaments. There is no point in having unlimited access to tournaments if the tournaments don't fill up and there is noone to play against.
oneshotveth wrote:
there aren't enough Ferrari's on the road, so I would like one for free.
I agree with your viewpoint, but that has to be the worst analogy I have EVER heard!
Personally I think the rule is fine: and you can join as many team matches and things as you like as a free member, plus the official tourneys.
Sep 27, 2010
0
#12
Eo____ wrote: The point of allowing more people to join tournaments is to allow everyone, premium and free members, but especially premium members, the opportunity to play in more tournaments. There is no point in having unlimited access to tournaments if the tournaments don't fill up and there is noone to play against.
A tournament selector wizard / tournament filter might help members locate suitable tournaments.
Sep 27, 2010
0
#13
Eo____ wrote:
I just finished looking at the tournaments list and couldn't find a single upcoming tournament that has enough people signed up for it. Allowing free members to join more than one tournament at a time might actually make tournaments more enjoyable for all those interested in being participants.
Huh? Most tournaments are set to start automatically once they have enough people. Hence, they will no longer appear in the upcoming tournament list; they become in-progress tournaments.
There are well over 100 pages of currently-active tournaments. In fact, it's probably more like 200-300 pages, but the system won't even go that high to show you. So the paying members are finding plenty of tournament action just fine without giving it away to non-paying members.
Even if that weren't the case, I wouldn't really be in favor of giving free members additional tournament benefits. It really messes up tournaments to have people disappearing in the middle of them, and that happens far too often with unpaid visitors.
Spiffe wrote:
Eo____ wrote:
I just finished looking at the tournaments list and couldn't find a single upcoming tournament that has enough people signed up for it. Allowing free members to join more than one tournament at a time might actually make tournaments more enjoyable for all those interested in being participants.
Huh? Most tournaments are set to start automatically once they have enough people. Hence, they will no longer appear in the upcoming tournament list; they become in-progress tournaments.
There are well over 100 pages of currently-active tournaments. In fact, it's probably more like 200-300 pages, but the system won't even go that high to show you. So the paying members are finding plenty of tournament action just fine without giving it away to non-paying members.
Even if that weren't the case, I wouldn't really be in favor of giving free members additional tournament benefits. It really messes up tournaments to have people disappearing in the middle of them, and that happens far too often with unpaid visitors.
I agree with Eo, and disagree with Spiffe.
I normally have 30-60 ganes going, and the majority are against free members. Free members do bring value to this site. I very seldom get opponents time out on me, and it's not always free members who do that.
Tournaments do take long to fill up. I think if we allow free members to enter slow filling tourneys, everybody will benefit.
Spiffe wrote:
Eo____ wrote:
Even if that weren't the case, I wouldn't really be in favor of giving free members additional tournament benefits. It really messes up tournaments to have people disappearing in the middle of them, and that happens far too often with unpaid visitors.
From my personal experience I can tell you that the opposite is true: premium members are the ones who sometimes mess up tournaments, especially the ones who abuse their vacation time and delay everyone playing in the tournament.
I think it is great that this site offers free members the possibility to play in tournaments. They can play in one tournament they can freely choose, plus they can play in any of the official chess.com tournaments.
And I completely understand that it is very reasonable to reserve the right to play more freely chosen tournaments to premium members. This is a very good possibility to distinguish between free and premium offers, and one of the many nice incentives to many members to get themselves a premium account.
There are good arguments to both sides of this.
---
-A huge portion of the free members who join the site don't stick around long.
-The ones that do are valuable contributors. (they may also cause a misconception that there are a higher percentage of them than there really are, because they're the ones you end up seeing and playing)
-A lot of tournaments have trouble filling.
-On the other hand there are always hundreds of tournaments in progress.
-Premium members in many cases are equally likely to stall or ruin a tournament.
Solution? Well, personally I think the current rules are fine (good membership incentive), just my two cents, but if anything ever is changed, it could be made so that free members who have stuck around the site for X amount of time and have played at least Y games can join 3 tournaments, free members with Z time and W games can join 5, and so on...
Sep 27, 2010
0
#18
Fezzik wrote:
I understand the need for chess.com to encourage people to pay for the site, so I agree in principle that free members should only be allowed to play in one tnmt at a time.
I would like to see something else though. For site-wide, major tnmts (such as championships), everyone should be allowed to enter regardless of whether they are free members who are already committed to another tnmt.
Is that a reasonable exception to the rule?
Free members can join as many official chess.com tournaments as they wish.
Right. Fezzik I think this thread is just about the member created ones.
I just finished looking at the tournaments list and couldn't find a single upcoming tournament that has enough people signed up for it. Allowing free members to join more than one tournament at a time might actually make tournaments more enjoyable for all those interested in being participants.