Question for Subscribers

[savin]

I know many of you are overrloaded with tournaments. So we are reluctant to just start some new ones. However, if any subscribers would like us to start a subscriber only tournament we would be more than willing to kick it off.

There are two good formats that might make sense:

1) Swiss. This would be just like the current Swiss Tournaments -- actually just like the Open Swiss. It would be open to subscribers only and would probably be set to 12 rounds. So each of you would get 12 games. We would suggest trying a slightly different format. We would launch 4 games to start with, then wait 8 weeks and launch 4 more, then wait 8 weeks and launch the last 4.

2) Divisional League. We would place about 10 in a division and this would be based on rating. Each player would play each other player in their league once, for a total of 9 games.

If there is any interest then we would launch the tournament and invite all subscribers.

So let us know.

[reyn]

For me, it's always a question as to how many games would be generated and how quickly.

For example, the current 2006 Open Swiss and Category 3 Swiss have already generated 8 games to this date.

Along with my single games, I would be quickly over-loaded with another tournament generating games that quickly.

---------------------------

On another note. I have a question about tournaments that have long since completed. Please look at the below screen print:



As you can see, there are a number of tournaments in my "Active Tournies" section that should no longer be showing as active, like #1, 4, 5, 6, and 7.

Is there a problem here?

[savin]

Reyn,

You bring a good point on the active/inactive tournaments. Stan and myself have to think about this.

The first problem is that a NetPlayer or Swiss tournament is still active ass long as a game is being played. We can't really say its "inactive" just because a player may have completed their games since their position in the tournament could change as long as games are still being played. We could make a netplayer tournament "inactive" by Division -- but right now we don't really have a way to do that.

Because of this wee have been setting the tournaments to finished "manually".

the last problem is we need to make sure that the tournament display screen is looking at the finished "flag" and correctly showing the tournament as inactive.

In answer to your question about number of games:

10 A NetPlayer style of tournament will typcially create a total of 9-10 games and create one every 10 days.

A Swiss tournament would normally create 4 games close together (or even at trhe same time) then wait 8-10 weeks and create 4 more and then wait 8-10 weeks and create 4 more.

[reyn]

Thanks for your response, Savin.

savin said:

However, if any subscribers would like us to start a subscriber only tournament we would be more than willing to kick it off.

I would be interested in a subscriber-only tournament (probably Swiss style) that would be within 300 rating points, or so, of my current rating. So, +/- 1700.

Is anyone else interested in this?

[Blockhead]

savin said:

If there is any interest then we would launch the tournament and invite all subscribers.

savin,

Like many others on SNC I very much appreciate all the splendid work you undertake on this site.

That said, I have some reservations about this sort of arbitrary division into sub groups. I'd be happy to participate in tournaments which perhaps restricted entry to those who have played say >100 and had played all without forfeit.

I think SNC players motivation and attitude towards the game, the site, and others who play here; far more important than whether one has paid (or not) for the privilege.

[reyn]

reyn said:

Thanks for your response, Savin.

savin said:

However, if any subscribers would like us to start a subscriber only tournament we would be more than willing to kick it off.

I would be interested in a subscriber-only tournament (probably Swiss style) that would be within 300 rating points, or so, of my current rating. So, +/- 1700.

Is anyone else interested in this?

Savin, what about the above?

[savin]

Reyn,

I could certainly open upa Swiss Tournament for subscribers as you requested. If I understand correctly you would restrict it to players in the 1400-2000 range. Of course the great thing about Swiss Tournaments is they tend to be self regulating in that players tend to play most of their games agains players of a similar level anyway.

The other option is I could start a Subscriber Only Division league Tournament with 8-10 players per division like the NetPlayers. The result is that most players would be grouped with players of a Similar ability as well. Let me know which format you would prefer and I will do the following:

1) Create the tournament
2) Send an invite to all subscribers

[savin]

Blockhead,

I don't think we are trying to exclude non-subscribers. However, there are a number of things that either pull a lot of personal resources from me and Stan or pull a lot more resources on the server. This puts Stan in a difficult position in that the site should definately cater to the needs of the subscribers who are afterall paying for everyone else to be allowed to play here for free.

These tournaments are quite a bit of work. My experience is they are about 10x the work when they involve non-subscribers since they, taken as a group, are more likely to leave the site etc.

Based on this we run two huge tournaments a year open to everyone ( NetPlayers league and Swiss Tournaments). Besides these we offer the subscribers mini tournaments. I can probably run 50 smaller subscriber tournaments for the same amount of effort that I put into one large tournament. I basically don't have the bandwidth to handle another large site tournament right now.

If some other players at the site want to organize tournaments for non-subscribers that is why we have associate tournaments.

We are very close to releasing a bunch of subscriber only reports. If we opened these up to everyone it would lead to increased network and server costs for Stan. The trouble is that a dedicated server and the type of bandwidth we use at this site are not free. The amount of hours that Stan puts into running the site outside his full time job is already large. So there are limits. So if everyone wants access to the new reports all they have to do is subscribe, the increased load will increase costs but there will be increased revenues to to cover the costs.

I hope this makes sense.

[reyn]

savin said:

If I understand correctly you would restrict it to players in the 1400-2000 range.

Yes, I would prefer this option.

Hopefully, we have enough players interested in this range that would join.

[savin]

Reyn,

Would you preffer a Swiss Style tournament or a Divisional League?

Swiss Tournaments don't work well for less than about 16 players. In CC world that number is probably more like 24.

The Divisional League is pretty flexible. We could take up to 13-14 in a division and yet it still is fine with 6-7.

Both systems are very good at getting player paired up with people of their own ability. The Swiss has the slight twist that if you are playing better than normal you will get to play better players than normal -- so its a great way to slowly improve.

Let me know.

[reyn]

savin said:

The Divisional League is pretty flexible. We could take up to 13-14 in a division and yet it still is fine with 6-7.

It sounds like we better go with the Divisional League then.

Let's see if there's the interest with that.

[savin]

Reyn,

I think, if you don't have a problem, I will create a tournament as follows:

1) Open to all subscribers that have completed at least 20 games (would you prefer this to be changed to only allow established subscribers? or drop the requirement to 15?)
2) Players will be placed in divisions so that the difference between the highest and lowest rated player in the division is no more than 400 rating points
3) Divisions will have between 7-10 players
4) Each player will play each other player in the division once
5) We will balance the number of games with white and black for each player

Invites will be sent to all qualified subscribers.

[reyn]

Savin, I'll go along with your recommendations. You know what will work out best, and in which situation we can get enough players.

Thanks.

[Blockhead]

savin said:

Blockhead, the site should definitely cater to the needs of the subscribers who are after all paying for everyone else to be allowed to play here for free.
=====
My experience is they are about 10x the work when they involve non-subscribers since they, taken as a group, are more likely to leave the site etc.

savin,

NS: non subscriber

Whilst agreeing with much of what you have said I would take issue with the above.

I agree one should give priority to those who pay; though I'm not happy with this growing assertion that subscribers are, "paying for everyone else to be allowed to play here for free.". It smacks of arrogant elitism.

Those who come and play here have been given a choice whether to subscribe or not. Making those who chose not to pay feel somehow obligated/grateful to those that do, does not sit well the open and welcoming ethos on which Stan started the site. Given the nature of the active online competition perhaps that ethos not sustainable given the pressing need for funding.

Such subscriber anti NS propaganda will have a counter effect on many. The way to promote a willingness to pay (and I think you and Stan have already started along this path!) is to provide value plus! Those 'extras' (e.g. the imminent player statistics you have mentioned) which many might feel are worth having ... I do!

As for your very broad brush comment, 'taken as a group', this may apply in a general sense for the whole NS group but there are many NS who have played here for a number of years, who have completed 100+ games with few if any forfeits. Their SNC playing records, their 'reliability', compare favourably with may subscribers.

I repeat, the best way to move NS hands into pockets is not through the stick, but the carrot!

That said, I still think you are the greatest! :}

[savin]

Blockhead,

I understand your sentiments. But for me as the poor sod running the tournaments its a no win situation. If I set up ssome subscriber only tournaments then its exactly what the site hass been doing for some time, the Site Tournaments are subscriber only. The enhanced tournaments were also meant to be subscriber only -- but we opened it to non-subscribers for a few key tournaments.

As the tournament director I am well aware that many non-subscribers are just as reliable as subscribers. But suddenly it becomes my own subjective view. If I say "only players with 100 established games" then what about the person that is highly ranked, plays about 30 games a year and has never forfeited? So I makie an exception. Then others say "what about me". Then I say "exclude anyone who has a large number of forfeits" -- but that is not fair to people who through no fault of their own (sickness) forfeited a bunch of games. So I make another exception. As I start to make the exceptions it quickly comes down to my personal opinion and lots of people will get annoyed. My only protection is to state very clear rules of entry and make no exceptions. As it was I had about 10 poison pen emails from annoyed players in the current large tournaments. For insatnce "What the X$%$ is the diference between 23 games and 25 games!!! Stupid!!!"

So although there are clearly people in the Non-subscriber group that would not increase my admin burden for running the tournament, by inviting them and not others I would have a huge increase in the emails I need to deal with.

I don't think offering new stuff to subscribers is elitist, I think its only fair that those making a contribution have certain advantages. One thing is very clear, the days of being able to support a site on advertising revenue alone is a thing of the distant past. I myself use a number of services that are "free" and make a decision of whether the extra benefits of paying are worth the cost. I never begrudge the people who are paying for having greater facilities or access to the site than me. I feel Stan's netChess is the same. There is a level of service offered to all members, whether they subscribe or don't subscribe. Then there is a higher level of service offered to those that subscribe that is above and beyond the "free" level.

Blockhead, one thing I'm sure of LOL, as a tournament director I never want to be in the situation of having to make exceptiosn for entry to a tournament. I get enough emails as it is LOL.

Cheers