Careful wht you do with our loved F

  
Free Internet Chess Games Server

Install FICGS apps
play chess online


Game result  (chess)


L. Sorbi, 2143
J. Helmer, 2100

1/2-1/2

See game 111370




 Hot news
 Discussions
 Files search
 Social network



European Go Database

                                          
Forum



Back to forum


Wayne Lowrance    (2010-04-25)
Careful wht you do with our loved F

Thibault, I have been here since the beginning. I have grown with FICGS. I am very proud to be a member of FICGS in good standing.

I see dangers ahead for you and our FICGS.
You need to be very careful my friend about Changing the overall makeup of FICGS. I think overall the "E" point conditions here is ok, as long as it does not infringe outward from where it is now> This latest proposal (buying into a high classification) is very bad and changes the premise of FICGS, which is: If you are good, diligent and work hard you will advance and be rewarded. Tites should not come easy. Same for rating points. For if they do come easy then they have no meaning.
Players who have earned their stripes do merit certain considerations, that is good and proper.

Another potential problem that I see is that FICGS is headed in a direction down yahoo chess lane. We all like these bullet games, they are fun. I am not at all suggesting their elimination. I am just counseling "be careful". Do not let it become the face of FICGS chess. Yahoo chess is a total disaster. I do not want our site to even look in that direction.
I have been monitoring the chatter on bullet chess and it is great, all are enjoying it. That covers the main points of interest for me. I am not against changes. I do not want changes that change the make up of FICGS as we know it now. Its your server, you may do as you wish of course Wayne


Wayne Lowrance    (2010-04-25 02:49:59)
Careful wht you do with our loved F

Having just read my post it does not take into consideration the renumeration value of changes. If you take FICGS, into the very profitable yahoo world, that would be good for you. You have a right to position yourself to maximize capital worth. This is good, it is what America is all about. So I should keep my big mouth shut I guess
Wayne


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-25 02:52:37)
FICGS

I understand you Wayne, I don't want to make such mistakes and that's why we talk so much about these changes in this forum :)

On entry fees for a higher class tournament, I agree on the main point of course, but some advantages had to be discussed. The success of this site is also money and money prizes in the future IMO so I prefer to discuss such ideas than to do nothing.

That was the first point. Then there are some other points that remain to be discussed IMO : 1) Maybe correspondence chess ratings should increase (in average) as engines become stronger. 2) Titles calculation rules should probably be harder as a consequence, maybe it should have been changed already.

Correspondence/Advanced chess is constantly evolving, our marks move fast, so rules may have to change. I don't think that FICGS can turn into a kind of Yahoo chess (I did not ever play there btw), the most important thing is the atmosphere and I know that if I make a mistake, someone will let me know very quickly as it happened once a few months ago. We all make that success in that way!


Wayne Lowrance    (2010-04-25 03:14:27)
Careful wht you do with our loved F

Thibault, okey dokie, I understand you, for sure, and you are right at reviewing your change options. You should. I am only one voice but I wanted to be heard.
I have said enough on Money entry into a high classification. You know I do not like it.
I agree 100% with your thinking regarding money. You need to profit. So any change that goes there and does not affect membership in a negative way is good for you. If the membership do not like certain changes, and they leave then money for you is affected. So it is a two way street.
Regarding chess rating should overall increase. Ok with me but do not see any advantage, all relative.
Regarding Increasing Title requirements.
That may be valid. Not sure one way or the other. Gotta think on that. But shooting from the hips, sounds ok.
Wayne


Garvin Gray    (2010-04-25 08:02:43)
Careful wht you do with our loved F

I would rather have to pay a membership fee per year of say $20 for increased access (or something like that) than being able to pay an entry fee to get into a higher division.


Scott Nichols    (2010-04-25 10:43:52)
Careful wht you do with our loved F

An annual membership fee is not a good idea at all IMO. Then you would change the whole concept of the "free" international games server. However I am a firm supporter of a small "take" from the entry fees for tournaments and E-point games.


Garvin Gray    (2010-04-25 11:04:18)
Careful wht you do with our loved F

Scott, I did say- I would rather - not that I want to see it. As I said in my previous post.


Hannes Rada    (2010-04-27 22:18:11)
Higher division

quote
I would rather have to pay a membership fee per year of say $20 for increased access (or something like that) than being able to pay an entry fee to get into a higher division.
unquote

Garvin, what do you expect from playing in a 'higher division' ?


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-27 23:01:42)
Careful wht you do with our loved F

More interesting (or challenging games at least) games, more chances to increase its rating, I guess.


Hannes Rada    (2010-04-27 23:52:33)
interesting games and rating

I think interesting games as well as boring games can be played in every class ...:-)
And rating means nothing nowadays.
1800 Elo player can be as strong or weak as a 2600 Elo rated player.
It's quite interesting: on the ICCF-forum the people are complaining that it is not possible to win a cc-game anymore.
Here people are claiming that it is not possible to increase the rating anymore.
Guys simply play chess, try different openings + ideas and you will have again fun, even if you don't win the game or you don't increase your rating :-)


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-28 08:53:55)
Careful wht you do with our loved F

Very true Hannes...

Many players try to reach the highest ratings before to relax and play more for fun & more openings (there is often a period to learn to lose &/or break the ego at correspondence chess, unlike Go)

A way to find more fun may be in faster games, with more madness and wins/losses... I hope that more players will try bullet games here :)

But that's not a reason not to talk about the ratings issue to try to make it more coherent if possible.

On the rate of draws, I'm not sure if it is so high yet, games played at the highest level may have less draws than in the category below as players do everything to avoid drawish lines. It is probably always too high anyway :)


Hannes Rada    (2010-04-28 19:52:28)
Draws

quote
On the rate of draws, I'm not sure if it is so high yet, games played at the highest level may have less draws than in the category below as players do everything to avoid drawish lines. It is probably always too high anyway :)
unquote

This is in my opinion another interesting topic to be discussed in another thread
How to avoid drawish lines ?!


Garvin Gray    (2010-05-03 09:57:22)
Careful wht you do with our loved F

hmm!


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-05-03 14:09:07)
How to avoid drawish lines ?!

Thanks for the up Garvin :) Yes, this question can probably be answered by revealing one's book secret lines only... so most players won't answer ;)


Garvin Gray    (2010-05-03 15:11:14)
Careful what you do with our loved F

I was only bumping this thread to try and get an update to the idea of earning entry to the next division up.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-05-08 21:08:51)
New proposition

Here's a new idea, based on the fact that I don't think I'll have time (before a while, at least) to implement a script that would allow 1 or 2 tournament's winners to enter a higher class waiting list... many particular cases, not so easy.

The idea :

We could allow one (actually 2 would be still ok IMO) tournament's winner to enter a higher class waiting list for 10 Epoints (not Euros, big difference as most Epoints are won in free tournaments and cannot be cashed out if not played in tournaments with entry fee). I would place the players in the waiting lists by myself but finally it may satisfy everyone -> A player rated 1900 could enter a 2000+ waiting list but could not enter a 2200+ waiting list, the server can offer more Epoints prizes (that just increased for chess tournaments, by the way), and players could find their place more easily in the ratings.

Any opinion?


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-05-08 23:45:26)
New proposition

Actually the main problem is IMO what to do if let's say 5 players rated 2000-2200 suddenly ask for an entry in a 2200+ (class M) waiting list... It may take so much time for the 5th player to be able to enter it (waiting for a 3rd M tournament starts if 2 players can have a ticket per tournament) that he may reach the 2200 mark before that his ticket be useful.


Garvin Gray    (2010-05-09 03:17:39)
Careful wht you do with our loved F

Thibault,

I have previously addressed the issue of what happens if players tie for first.

In my opinion, it should be person with highest rating at the end of the tournament that gets the invite to the next division.

I have proposed end of tournament rating for this at it would be a more accurate guide to each players potential.

The entry fee for this qualified player should be the amount they won in their previous division.

I am against four or five players qualifying as it could lead to collusion between players, or at least the appearance of collusion (paranoia).

Also having the possibility of more than one player going through could lead to more draw agreements as players realise they do not have to score 5.5/6 or so to get the spot in the next division.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-05-09 23:31:20)
Careful wht you do with our loved F

Sorry Garvin, I was not clear enough, I meant "what to do if let's say 5 players rated 2000-2200 (who won 5 different tournaments !) suddenly ask for an entry in a 2200+ (class M) waiting list".

We can discuss your other suggestions of course, everything is possible there, but we must find an "agreement" on the other points before :)

> The entry fee for this qualified player should be the amount they won in their previous division.

I guess that we could try this way, but it seems a bit unfair for the winners of strong tournaments, any other opinion?


Garvin Gray    (2010-05-10 14:42:11)
Careful wht you do with our loved F

First of all, can we change the incorrect spelling in the thread title, it is start to shit me lol

Anyways, on to the thread topic.

Ok, now I understand what you are talking about Thib. Different tournament winners decide to exercise their right to enter the next highest division at the same time.

Rule One: Winning a tournament entitles you to enter the next highest division up. This is valid for the next tournament only in the division you have qualified for.

Upper qualification can not be stored for use at any future time.

The qualification only exists in the section you qualified in ie standard or rapid. It can not be transferred to the other section.

Thib, I do not think there will be ever be a situation where 5 players try and exercise their qualification rights into the exact same tournament at the same time.

Also the two rules above should help in reducing the chances of this happening.

In cases where two or more players do attempt to enter the same 'upper' division, the first person to pay their entry fee will get entry.

The idea of first person to pay is the earlier the commitment, the more benefit the 'committer' receives.

I have not yet come up with an idea for those who try to exercise their earnt option and miss out. Should they lose their opportunity, or it retained for the next tournament that they could enter.

Could be quite a long reserve list and also by the beginning of the 2nd tournament, the player may have lost more rating points and it can be shown by their results that they probably should not be going up.

Maybe on the reserves list, it should be listed by TER and the highest TER gets first option when it comes to second tournaments.

Does this make sense?


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-05-10 15:14:35)
Entry fee for higher class tournament

Garvin, you can change the title for your posts in the discussion :)

Well, all your ideas may work fine, let's discuss it again in the original discussion on this topic :

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=forum_read&id=8545

I just made a new proposal there.


Garvin Gray    (2010-05-10 15:27:10)
Careful wht you do with our loved F

It is the thread title that I am wanting changed, not just the title for my responses ;)









 

Message




Chat



 

December 15, 2018

FICGS is also a social network including seo forums, a hot news & buzz blog, a free web directory and discussion forums to meet people from all over the world. Discuss the last events, improve your search engines optimization, submit your website, share your interests...


Feel free to link to FICGS chess server, register & win Epoints :






FICGS Go server, weiqi baduk banner facebook      
Correspondence chess

World championship

Play chess games

Go (weiqi, baduk)

Advanced chess

Play big chess

Chess trainer apk

Rated tournaments

Poker texas hold'em

Fischer random chess

      FICGS correspondence chess banner facebook