tournaments: 1001-1200 group

I'm new to both chess.com and tournaments, but I've noticed a number of complaints regarding "sandbaggers" in the 1001-1200 group for the 11th tournament (my first).  The issue seems to focus mostly on new, premium members who "buy" themselves a 1200 rating and enter tournaments that are way below their actual level.  Members seem frustrated that they have little shot of competing to win a tournament that's supposed to be against other members with similar ratings.

The issue:

The group of people who start a tournament rated from 1000-1199 enter the tournament having completed some number of games.  Whether many or few games, their results put them in the group just below the 1200 default rating.  However, the group of people with exactly a 1200 rating is different.  Some of them presumably fall on that exact level after playing online games, while some group of them "buy" the rating without any games played. 

Its hard to fault chess.com for allowing people willing to pay up from entering tournaments - after all, chess.com needs to make money to stay alive.  But what group should this unique 1200 class join in a tournament?  Clearly the evidence of prior tournaments show that a meaningful, persistent number of them prove out over time to have substantially higher ratings than the original default rating (see the data in the 11th tournament 1001-1200 discussion group).

Possible alternatives:

1.  Tournaments could be organized so that one group that is 1000-1199, and another group that is 1200-1400.  New premium members can still join and participate in tournaments immediately. However, since they haven't proved out a rating for themselves yet, they are forced to compete at a higher level, thereby limiting the potential disparity between those better players and the rest of the field that they compete against. 

2. The tournament could allow members with 5+ games and an exact ranking of 1200 to compete in the lower group, while putting the unproven 1200 players into the 1200-1400 group.

3.  chess.com could alternate where the 1200 group is placed in tournaments.  So 12th tournament would be 1001-1199 and 1200-1400, 13th tournament 1001-1200 and 1201-1400, etc.  Therefore the potential disparity of unproven players in the group wouldn't always fall on the same group of members.

4.  Tournaments could allow someone without any onine game experience to opt into a higher group of their choice (but not a lower one).  Therefore, if these players know they have a high rating in other forums, they can try to more accurately place themselves for the first tournament.  As it stands, a very good player's only option is to play in the 1001-1200 group or opt out entirely.

5.  Increase the minimum game level, and have an "open" division for those who don't have the minimum number of games.  Allows everyone to play in some tournament from day 1, while ensuring that ratings based groups have proven their rankings over a longer period.

this is a very good point.