In the next few days the automatic timeout of tournament games will be turned on. This is a vital feature to ensure that tournaments don't stagnate when players fail to complete games. The process to action the timeouts will run on a schedule throughout the day. As such games that pass their game time will not immediately timeout, but could remain active for a few hours. Players will still be able to claim timeouts as soon as the time is up.

In addition there will be automatic timeouts on non-tournament games. This is purely for housekeeping purposes and will only apply to games that have been domant for many months.

Please feel free to comment on these changes.

Regards

As you know I am in favor of this.  It removes the stigma attached to "claiming a timeout", not that there should be any.  Overstepping the time limit in any game of chess is as valid a loss/win as is checkmate.  There ought not be any stigma to claiming a win for a timeout.

On another matter, I'm not familiar with the tournament formats you are using, nor with the scoring system used.  How about a message to the home page, outlining the different formats, and the scoring methods.

Thanks,
WP

As you know I am in favor of this.  It removes the stigma attached to "claiming a timeout", not that there should be any.  Overstepping the time limit in any game of chess is as valid a loss/win as is checkmate.  There ought not be any stigma to claiming a win for a timeout.

On another matter, I'm not familiar with the tournament formats you are using, nor with the scoring system used.  How about a message to the home page, outlining the different formats, and the scoring methods.  Do section winners move on to a second round eliminating the others, or does everyone continue for a set number of rounds with cumulative scoring, as in a Swiss?

Thanks,
WP

As you know I am in favor of this.  It removes the stigma attached to "claiming a timeout", not that there should be any.  Overstepping the time limit in any game of chess is as valid a loss/win as is checkmate.  There ought not be any stigma to claiming a win for a timeout.

On another matter, I'm not familiar with the tournament formats you are using, nor with the scoring system used.  How about a message to the home page, outlining the different formats, and the scoring methods.  Do section winners move on to a second round eliminating the others, or does everyone continue for a set number of rounds with cumulative scoring, as in a Swiss?

Thanks,
WP

woodpusher,

I've updated the Help/FAQs section with some basic details on Tournaments.

The current tournaments are knock-outs. Winners progress to the next round.

woodpusher,

I've updated the Help/FAQs section with some basic details on Tournaments.

The current tournaments are knock-outs. Winners progress to the next round.

Swiss tournaments are in the plans for future development.

I'm inclined to agree with WP re. the auto timeouts and would far prefer this method to the individual having to decide on the matter.

Hi Stoney,
I have checked the FAQ and still puzzled re. scoring in tournaments. For instance, if 3 pts are awarded for a win, how is it that in Tournament #2 Foamy has 15pts for 2 wins and WP has 18pts for 3wins. It goes on like this with other players without seeming consistancy. I must surely be missing something obvious.

chunga,

I see where the confusion might come in. The points column is the total of games played as both black and white. So looking left to right Foamy has two wins as white, and top to bottom 3 wins as black, giving a total of 15 points. I'll add this to the FAQs soon.

Regards

Sorry Stoney, forgot one other thing re. opponents matching.
Could you please let us know how opponents are matched.

Sorry Stoney, forgot one other thing re. opponents matching.
Could you please let us know how opponents are matched. Thanks

I have set up two methods of deciding which players goes in which groups

1) Random sequence - At the time I start the tournament the sequence of the players is randomised and split into the required number of groups.

2) Rating sequence - Players are split-up based on ratings at the time the tournament starts. Players are ordered in descending rating and placed in the groups. For a tournament with 16 players and groups of 4 the groups would be:
Group 1 - Players 1, 5, 9 and 13
Group 2 - Players 2, 6, 10 and 14
Group 3 - Players 3, 7, 11 and 15
Group 4 - Players 4, 8, 12 and 16

I'll add this to the FAQ's. If you have any sugestions of other ways to group the players let me know.

Regards

I have set up two methods of deciding which players go in which groups

1) Random sequence - At the time I start the tournament the sequence of the players is randomised and split into the required number of groups.

2) Rating sequence - Players are split-up based on ratings at the time the tournament starts. Players are ordered in descending rating and placed in the groups. For a tournament with 16 players and groups of 4 the groups would be:
Group 1 - Players 1, 5, 9 and 13
Group 2 - Players 2, 6, 10 and 14
Group 3 - Players 3, 7, 11 and 15
Group 4 - Players 4, 8, 12 and 16

I'll add this to the FAQ's. If you have any sugestions of other ways to group the players let me know.

Regards

Hi Stoney,
After seeing the obvious mismatching of tournament  games,that is, very high rated players vs very low rated players. I wondered if it might be fairer to have more equal rated players as opponents, at least at the onset to give every player an even chance of progressing.

Dear Stoney,
I am astonished to see the excessive increment of group matches rather than knockouts or swiss system.
   I have myself played 30 and won 12 tournaments and
I therefore cannot myself accept group tournaments.
   I just wanted to ask you when will the swiss system start?
I also suggest that we should have seperate tournaments for the sites top 10 players,and players of different  of same   caliber    to play  together.

Regards and thank you for your hard work,
ANDU,
SHASHWAT KISHORE FROM INDIA.