that was before you "upped your game"I've also now taken that approach....
ChessConquest - official discussion thread
- Thread starter Solitude
- Start date
that was before you "upped your game"I've also now taken that approach....
I think we are going to need game five! Maybe we are scared of the next apponent that is patiently waiting!
It seems to me that in tournaments we are wasting time unnecessarily when both players time out their games. What happens is that if both players time out, they each end on one point, so another game has to be arranged. In this game the player that drew black invariably times out again. Now the White player (who has still not made a move) advances to the next round. And now (surprise surprise) loses on a timeout again.
This timestaking performance is nonsense!
I suggest that whenever both players time out in a match, they are BOTH eliminated. Their opponent in the next round then goes through unopposed, saving time, speeding up tournaments and preventing farcical "matches".
Are there any other views on this matter?
This timestaking performance is nonsense!
I suggest that whenever both players time out in a match, they are BOTH eliminated. Their opponent in the next round then goes through unopposed, saving time, speeding up tournaments and preventing farcical "matches".
Are there any other views on this matter?
This makes a lot of sense TallFred. Will look into revising the tournament system accordingly.
Solitude
Mr. Nice Guy
It's almost random. It looks to see if your name is Solitude. If it's not then you are paired randomly. If it is then it makes sure that you will play against tallfred or jakkals before getting to the last round.
Actually it looks like it works on the rating and it works well because the strong players (like tallfred and jakkals) will most likely end up playing each other right at the end.
ViperGTI
New member
It's almost random. It looks to see if your name is Solitude. If it's not then you are paired randomly. If it is then it makes sure that you will play against tallfred or jakkals before getting to the last round.
Actually it looks like it works on the rating and it works well because the strong players (like tallfred and jakkals) will most likely end up playing each other right at the end.
Yep... or they give me 6-8 games against Solitude and Sloth at the same time
But I suppose that's my bad for entering too many tournaments when the site started. I'm spinning a bit at the moment and losing holiday time fast.
Solitude
Mr. Nice Guy
Yep... or they give me 6-8 games against Solitude and Sloth at the same time
But I suppose that's my bad for entering too many tournaments when the site started. I'm spinning a bit at the moment and losing holiday time fast.
Same here. My holiday time is just about all out. Luckily my games are getting less and less as I lose them.
Cicero
New member
Hahahaha. I was just wondering because most tournaments pair the best player with the worst for the first round and so on, then you pretty much always end up with the best players at the end - and rightfully so. You dont want to pair a your no1 and 2 players against eachother in the first round coz one obviously will be eliminated too early.It's almost random. It looks to see if your name is Solitude. If it's not then you are paired randomly. If it is then it makes sure that you will play against tallfred or jakkals before getting to the last round.
Actually it looks like it works on the rating and it works well because the strong players (like tallfred and jakkals) will most likely end up playing each other right at the end.
My only problem with a system like that is that the minnows have absolutely no luck at all. No chance at all. They are guaranteed to get eliminated in the first round.
And I'm cool with that...although couldn't there be secondary 'loser rounds' involved for them then? So all the losers get paired against eachother and play until an overall winner there too etc etc. Just a thought.
This is called a booster tournament. I have suggested this to yotta, and he has promised to implement it.
It's almost random. It looks to see if your name is Solitude. If it's not then you are paired randomly. If it is then it makes sure that you will play against tallfred or jakkals before getting to the last round.
Actually it looks like it works on the rating and it works well because the strong players (like tallfred and jakkals) will most likely end up playing each other right at the end.
I have been giving this series of posts a lot of thought. A the end of the messy process two messages have emerged:
1) Yotta, how about having a tournament with a random draw, purely as an experiment?
2) Do not have a sense of overawe at the higher rated players. Some of them (such as myself) are overrated. Some of them (such as myself) are having dips of form. Some of them (such as myself) are being distracted by real world issues. That means that there are rating points to be made with a bit of luck, planning and application. You make your own luck by your attitude that flows into putting in that extra bit of effort.
I know what I am talking about: I have thrown away games against very strong players because my mind was not right from the beginning. Now that I am in the position of having a better rating than most, I present the examples of leosky and win4433 who are both showing that I (for one) have weaknesses to be exploited. Put in your best.
By the way, full marks to herzog. He has lost several games to me, but he does not mind. Each time he challenges me and goes at it 100% as if he has never played against me before. He is improving, and it is a pleasure to see.
Markface, you're right in saying that the best player is paired against the worst for the first round and so on, to ensure that the best players face each other at the end.
We will look at implementing swiss tournaments in version 2 of ChessConquest, where there are secondary 'loser rounds'.
Last edited:
Some other players also requested something similar. Personally I think your idea of Booster tournaments is still a more elegant solution to the pairing of players in tournaments... however, always good to try new ideas.
Once version 2 is rolled out I'll put together a couple of "experiment" tournaments to establish which methods works best for an online internet chess community.
First tournaments are starting to finish... looks like Willie is on a mission to fill his trophy cabinet...
We've updated the tournament page to list tournament winners...
http://www.chessconquest.com/index.php?p=tournaments
We've updated the tournament page to list tournament winners...
http://www.chessconquest.com/index.php?p=tournaments
Well done Willie! You are setting a high standard.
This news is a huge milestone to celebrate for ChessConquest. Well done yotta for successfully building and implementing tournaments and for bringing the site to this point. I look forward to seeing how the site grows and matures.
Last edited:
Cicero
New member
hehe, awesome.
Hey Yotta, I often use the conditional move planner to just check a few possible options the opponent has. I dont neccessarily save the moves, as I dont like a player to know that I'm predicting what he does.
The problem is, when it is my turn to move. I can't do the predictions because the conditional moves thing has disappeared. And often I do stupid moves (which are blatantly obvious once I do them) and get royally burned because of it afterwards. Could you enable the conditional moves feature for when its your turn, however, just not allow saving of them obviously?
Just a thought.
Hey Yotta, I often use the conditional move planner to just check a few possible options the opponent has. I dont neccessarily save the moves, as I dont like a player to know that I'm predicting what he does.
The problem is, when it is my turn to move. I can't do the predictions because the conditional moves thing has disappeared. And often I do stupid moves (which are blatantly obvious once I do them) and get royally burned because of it afterwards. Could you enable the conditional moves feature for when its your turn, however, just not allow saving of them obviously?
Just a thought.