TOURNAMENT TROUBLES! — Tournaments for all games.

Kamikaze

8/6/2007 1:00 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Svercha;105243

We could limit the number of unofficial tournaments. For example, allow only 3 unofficial tournaments to run simultaneously. The rest would be queued. Once one of the 3 tournaments ends, the next one in the queue can start...

That's a good suggestion. Otherwise, there are sometimes only two or even one running :p

In reply to Kamikaze

Kyle

8/7/2007 6:17 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Kamikaze;105662

Or maybe two or even one :pyeah, or maybe just ban them altogether... and the problem will solve itself... :D
no tournament - no problem! :D

But seriously:
An unofficial tournament is unofficial for a reason! It can be held as many times as one wants! Moreover, any rules can be used for the tournament, or none at all! And any portal user can organize them!
If we introduce a limit on the number of tournaments, then it would make sense to also limit the rules. But then what would be the difference between an official and an unofficial tournament? Only the organizer. Does that make any sense? In my opinion, no.
Because why are one organizer's tournaments official while another's are not? Even though the second one might run tournaments far better than the official one..

Respectfully.

Кто состоянием своим доволен, тому жить весело. (с)Алекса́ндр Васи́льевич Суво́ров

In reply to Kyle

AmberSoler

8/7/2007 6:32 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Kyle;105777

Yeah, or maybe they should be banned altogether... and the problem disappears on its own... :D
No tournament - no problem! :D

Then it makes sense to allow the "officialization" procedure. :) Any organizer receives a license and holds their own official tournament if they wish... Then you can always ask them - do they have a license? i.e., will you have rating support or not? All other decisions follow from this - whether to play in this tournament or not...

Сначала было слово...
FizMiG v.2.0 *** Очередное обновление справочника! *** http://vk.com/fizmig

In reply to AmberSoler

K0Lb@zzeR

8/7/2007 7:08 AM UTC

Auto-translated

AmberSoler;105781

Then it makes sense to allow the "officialization" procedure. :) Any organizer receives a license and holds their official tournament if they wish... Then you can always ask them - do they have a license? i.e., will there be rating support or not? All other decisions follow from this - whether to play in this tournament or not...

A good suggestion. I completely agree with AmberSoler.

:smile13: [ТУРНИР] "Гонка за Лидером" :smile13:
:smile28: [M] "Я и моя тень" - "I am and my shadow" :smile28:
:smile16: ~~"Быстрая смерть" - "Fast Death"~~ :smile16:

In reply to AmberSoler

IronAxe

8/7/2007 7:12 AM UTC

Auto-translated

AmberSoler;105781

Then it makes sense to allow the "officialization" procedure. :) Any organizer receives a license and holds their official Tournament if they wish... Then you can always ask them - do they have a license? i.e., will you have rating support or not? All other decisions follow from this - whether to play in this Tournament or not...

That's also good. I just didn't understand the restriction on unofficial Tournaments that way. At least 2 official Tournaments take place in a month. Let's say 5 unofficial Tournaments received a license, and all of them are for rating. But each player can only receive a rating from, say, two (a predetermined limit) unofficial Tournaments, even if they play in all five. Because it will again turn out that those who have less time to play will not be able to play in 7 Tournaments in a month. There are drawbacks in that it complicates the accounting of which Tournament the player's rating should be counted towards in their overall score out of five unofficial Tournaments. But it seems that the player will have a choice of the best results from 5 unofficial Tournaments, and at the same time, they will participate in creating a quorum for those unofficial Tournaments for which they decided not to include their rating in the overall score. Even in a situation where they score 100 in all five. Only 200 will be counted towards their score. However, they will not allow others to get an easy advantage with their presence in the remaining Tournaments. Because the rating of the remaining players will still be calculated relative to their hundred.
In my opinion, this increases the player's interest in playing as many rating Tournaments as possible, choosing the best results for themselves, and possibly suppressing the rating of other participants whom they will overtake in other Tournaments for which their rating will not be included in the overall score.

In reply to AmberSoler

K0Lb@zzeR

8/7/2007 7:34 AM UTC

Auto-translated

AmberSoler;104977

In my opinion, there is only one criterion – the players' interest in the tournament.

How to solve the issue:

1. Award a rating for all official tournaments.
2. Consider unofficial tournaments that gather a quorum as official.

That's it. There are no problems. :)

To avoid further disputes, I suggest voting on this new rule, and everything will fall into place on its own.

Svercha;105243

We can set a limit on the number of unofficial tournaments. For example, 3 unofficial tournaments at a time. The rest can be put in a queue. When one of the tournaments from the "3" ends, the next one can be started...

And I completely agree with that. Only 3 unofficial tournaments should be held simultaneously. Those who want to hold a tournament can wait in a queue... when one tournament ends, they can hold theirs if they wish.

:smile13: [ТУРНИР] "Гонка за Лидером" :smile13:
:smile28: [M] "Я и моя тень" - "I am and my shadow" :smile28:
:smile16: ~~"Быстрая смерть" - "Fast Death"~~ :smile16:

In reply to AmberSoler

Kyle

8/7/2007 7:35 AM UTC

Auto-translated

AmberSoler;105781

Then it makes sense to allow an "officialization" procedure. :) Any organizer gets a license and holds their official tournament, if they wish...

Interesting proposal.
The question is at what point will they receive the license? Before? or after? and who will be issuing it?

to IronAxe: The idea of choosing the best result by rating seems not very good to me. because I believe that if a tournament is rated, then the player must receive the rating for that specific tournament.
Yes, and furthermore, in my opinion, a selection system would not be very functional; i.e., one doesn't really want to "chase" all users and ask: "Do you want to include the rating for 'such-and-such' tournament in your 'Player Rating'?"

Respectfully.

Кто состоянием своим доволен, тому жить весело. (с)Алекса́ндр Васи́льевич Суво́ров

In reply to Kyle

K0Lb@zzeR

8/7/2007 8:52 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Kyle;105797

Interesting proposal.
The question is, at what point will they receive the license? Before or after? And who will issue it?

Well, most likely, it will be those who organize official tournaments.
And you could also create a separate licensing department, which would include the people who actually organize official tournaments. And this department would issue licenses for organizing unofficial tournaments.

:smile13: [ТУРНИР] "Гонка за Лидером" :smile13:
:smile28: [M] "Я и моя тень" - "I am and my shadow" :smile28:
:smile16: ~~"Быстрая смерть" - "Fast Death"~~ :smile16:

In reply to Kyle

IronAxe

8/7/2007 9:58 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Kyle;105797

I don't think the idea of selecting the best result based on rating is very good. Because I believe that if a tournament is rated, the player must receive a rating for that tournament.

:) You're impossible to understand. Well, then I'll have time to participate in all the unofficial tournaments and play in the official ones, and I also play all versions. What are the chances of catching up with me in the overall rating? At least there's some limitation on including ratings from unofficial tournaments.

Kyle;105797

Yes, and besides, I think the selection system will not be very efficient, i.e., I don't want to "chase" after all users and ask: "Do you want to include the rating for "this" tournament in your "overall rating"?"

:) But bread doesn't grow on trees. Quite the opposite. You just need to notify the player that if they don't submit a request in time about what to include and what not, they will automatically receive a rating for the first two tournaments in order, and then they can figure it out themselves :) so they can work better on their rating policy :)
PS. I'm not insisting on this. In general, I don't really care what they come up with regarding the rating. I agree with vbn, it doesn't matter what system is used - you just need to play in tournaments and try to take the highest places, then you have more chances to be in first place with ANY system. But I'll add something of my own :) Play ALL versions, then the chance of being the overall winner is greater, if you don't accept my proposal regarding the Kanigam tournament, where ratings are counted only from five rounds chosen by the player. And this is not much different from my proposal above regarding unofficial tournaments ;) And if you pass a law not to count ratings in unofficial tournaments, it will be easier for me :) I won't have to waste time on them. I'll have an extra beer ;)

In reply to IronAxe

Alex_R

8/7/2007 10:24 AM UTC

Auto-translated

IronAxe;105823

Bread doesn't follow you; it's the other way around. You just need to inform players that if they don't submit their requests on time regarding what should and shouldn't be counted, they'll automatically get results for the first two tournaments in order, and then they can figure it out themselves. So they can work better on their rating policy.

Exactly... I asked nicely... to be removed from the blitz tournament rating, but apparently they don't want to... saying that everything is already tied up! But isn't it up to me to decide where I want my rating to be and where not?!... Rating is like a reward... I want to take off a keychain from my neck... I do what I want... it's my rating!!!:smile51:

In reply to Alex_R

Kyle

8/7/2007 10:40 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Alex_R;105831

But don't I decide where to put my rating, and where not?! ... rating is like a reward ... I wanted to, I took the keychain off my neck ... I do what I want ... it's my rating!!!:smile51:

No, you only decide whether to send me the save file or not. But once you've sent it, and after it's been counted... you can't refuse the rating...
because if you're removed, everything has to be recalculated...
you refused now - I have to recalculate...
then someone else refuses - I have to recalculate...
and so on.
You know what I'm going to say to all of you?

Кто состоянием своим доволен, тому жить весело. (с)Алекса́ндр Васи́льевич Суво́ров

In reply to Kyle

Alex_R

8/7/2007 11:02 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Kyle;105834

Now that you've declined, I have to recalculate...
Then someone else declines, and I have to recalculate again...
And so on.
You know what I'm going to say to all of you?

I understand that this is an unnecessary headache for the accountant, but I was and am the only one who asked for this... they could have just recalculated it once... especially since if the system is well-designed (e.g., in Excel), it's not difficult to delete one of the bottom rows!
P.S. While they're at it, they could also fix the errors... in the nicknames.

In reply to Alex_R

Kyle

8/7/2007 11:11 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Alex_R;105841

I understand that this is an unnecessary headache for the accountant, but I was and am the only one who asked for this... they could have just recalculated it once... especially since if the system is well-designed (e.g., in Excel), it's not difficult to delete one of the bottom rows!!!

It doesn't matter that you're the only one right now. Later, another person will appear, and then another, and the main thing will be the precedent, and those who want to take advantage of it will appear either in this tournament or the next.
Therefore, there will be no exceptions.

Alex_R;105841

P.S. While you're at it, you could fix the errors... in the nicknames;)

And we are always ready to fix the nicknames.
Where are the errors? Please list them, and I will definitely fix them.

Sincerely.

Кто состоянием своим доволен, тому жить весело. (с)Алекса́ндр Васи́льевич Суво́ров

In reply to Kyle

Ley

8/7/2007 12:24 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Kyle;105842

It doesn't matter that you're alone right now. Later, another one will be found, and then another. The main thing is that there will be a precedent, and those who want to take advantage of it will appear, if not in this tournament, then in the next.

There's no point in arguing here; they will be found, you can be sure of it. :)

Kyle;105842