Maybe one should implement a function that monitors players that in a day or 2 drops more that 100-150 in rating and then prevents them from entering tournaments for 1 month.
goog idea but you looked at my example many players like me will be suspended from the tournament with no reason
The technical term is 'sandbagging'.
100-150 might be a bit strickt of course. But mayby at least one can define a given limit. Another option is to monitur how may resigned games one have in a row, but that might also be unfair. So mayby a combination of no of resigned games in a row, and a rating drop.
I can tell you there is protection against sandbagging on Chess.com.
I myself had to quit a bunch of games I had going back in April, due to big storms and flooding where I live. I didn't even have electricity at my house for two weeks.
My rating didn't drop much (there's not much to take haha!) But when I eventually got back online and tried to join a tournament, I was not allowed. The site said "you must have a timeout ratio lower than 25% to play in this tournament." That seems like a pretty good measure. I still can't join tournaments. I now have to play a bunch of non tournament games to get my timeout ratio back down.
In short, I don't see how people can intentinally sandbag, unless they carefully calculate a way to time out 24% of their games or something.
In any case, I hope someone from Chess.com takes a look at this, because it doesn't matter if someone has intentionally dropped their rating or not.
Just like the OP does with tournaments, I try to select someone at my own level from "open seeks." After I start a game, I often find out the opposing player is much stronger, but thier rating has gone from 1700 or 1800 to 1400 of 1500 over time becuase they couldn't be bothered for a while, or something like that.
Like I said, I don't see how someone can sandbag for a tournament. In any case maybe the answer is as simple as stipulating that tournaments can only be joined based on a player's "highest ever" rating, but then I don't know how any rating adjustments would be worked out.
When it comes to Open Seeks, the option presently exists to start a game, then check out your opponent, then abort the game if you don't like what you see. I think that's unnecesarily time consuming.
I'd really like to see a split rating, displayed with the present rating and the highest one together. For expample mine would be 1431/1491 (or the other way around, whatever is easier to follow).
I hope all that made sense... ;-)
How about it Chess.com? Please?
When I enter a tournament I often select the tournament based on the allowed rating level. This is to ensure that I compete with others at my own level (and that is quite low). But I’ve seen that a lot of players dump their rating by resigning from a lot of game just before the start of the tournaments. A player might then be shown as an 1100 player but was just one day before a 2000 rated player. I understand that some like to win. But this is like an adult competing against children. I guess it’s not illegal, but I don’t really see the point. At least not at chess.com we are playing for fun and glory, not for any price money.
If you look at the lower level tournaments, quite often you will at least find one player who resigned lots of games the day before that start of the tournament. I could of course give examples of players, but I don’t want to single out specific players.
People dumping their rating are taking the fun out of the tournaments for me. I don’t want and will not, nor can I become the greatest player in the world at chess. I just want to compete against people at my own level and have fun with it.
Maybe one should implement a function that monitors players that in a day or 2 drops more that 100-150 in rating and then prevents them from entering tournaments for 1 month.