|
|
|
Topic: Is there a limit on # of simultaneous tournaments I can play in
| |
|
|
Author
| Message |
|---|
|
|
I think my true strength is close to 1900. I want to play in an advance section. I am at 1893. If I momentarily crest 1900 I wont be able to play because I have 64 games going. If my actual strength is only 1880 I might never go over 1900 again. Becuase of my schedule I thought I could win some games at 10d/all on time. This stratagy has backfired. My opponents are on all the time, atleast as strong as I am. And one of these games might continue beyond when I would be down to fifty otherwise. The new rule should have been implemented with warning and gradually.
|
|
|
| miguel wrote: The 50 game rule is under testing now, it is there to prevent a small number of players (< 1%) to abuse the system by playing several hundreds of games. |
Sorry -- I came back to the thread as I was looking for something else. But in what sense is it abuse of the system to play several hundred games simultaneously?
|
|
|
@richerby - I think the abuse was people joining many, many tournaments BUT then resigning any opponent they didn't like their chances against, thus screwing up the balance of the tourney for everyone else.
I do thibnk 50 active games is a bit tight as a limit - with typical 7d/m timing, even assuming my opponents moved instantly, I'd only have to make seven moves per day on average. Given a bunch of games will be in the opening and require relatively little hard thought, it's not much of a load, and I'd have thought 100 games ongoing was a more reasonable limit.
But, to be honest, a rule which more directly addressed the perceived problem (based on early resignations, say?) would seem better. Though of course harder to implement I guess.
|
|
|
| MadScot wrote: I think the abuse was people joining many, many tournaments BUT then resigning any opponent they didn't like their chances against, thus screwing up the balance of the tourney for everyone else. |
I agree but the abuse is the resignations, not the joining many tournaments. The correct way to deal with that would be to disable the account of anyone who resigns games without moving (perhaps after first sending a warning). Besides, there was only one person doing this and he stopped using the site over a month ago, now.
|
| Previous 1 2 |
|
|
|
