Let's organize a tournament.

Guys, just to clarify. Lesha and I have always been against dividing players into "noobs" and "masters" without a sufficient number of games. You simply can't learn by playing against other players.

I don't know who you mean by "Lesha," but I definitely know that I have always been against dividing players based on their gaming experience, and I still am. However, a precedent has already been set in the League, and unfortunately, some players have gotten used to it. Let's not point fingers. The idea of divisions is being discussed precisely to prevent the situation from evolving into a "closed club." Two divisions are being formed, and in each of them, opponents can play a round-robin tournament within the framework of the tournament rules. I am a supporter of this format, where everyone plays everyone else within their division, and the final results of these games most fully reflect the standings, unlike the Swiss system. Now, about the advantages of divisions: 1) Relatively equal composition of the divisions; 2) Minimization of "easy" points; 3) Minimization of technical losses; 4) Minimization of forfeited matches (based on the principle that "it doesn't matter anyway, I have nothing to lose"); 5) Possible reduction in tournament duration, even with a round-robin (three divisions could be considered!); 6) And perhaps most importantly, the emergence of real motivation and risks, because the results of the games will allow players from the first division not only to advance to the playoff matches with players from the higher division within the tournament but also to move into this very "higher division" based on the results. Conversely, the player (or players) from the higher division who finishes in last place will be moved to the first division (like in football leagues). A tournament with such rules can be made permanent (seasonal or quarterly, or something else). And, of course, other tournaments, such as cup tournaments, etc., can be held in parallel. That's the idea.