rednaz23: I've agreed with that for a long time - but 10 is too low. (for example, when i was making a lot of "fast start" 5 player tournaments, I could easily make 15-20 tournaments... almost all would fill up and start in the first few days.

But a limit of 20 or 25 public tournaments waiting for "sign-up" would be something I would support.

Plus I would LOVE to see the the "time for deadline" be changed from the current 29 days after start to something more resonable like 5 or 10 days after start date.... which if someone REALLY wants it to wait longer can easily change the start date to keep it on there longer. (Most tournaments I see go a few days past will stay on there for the whole time with very few getting more players... so no point keeping them open for the next month.)

coan.net: all would depends on the type of games .. i agree with 10 maximun because i can create one tourney with all games wich multiply per 10 times makes over 100 tourneis for each .... so could go up to 1000 tourneis ...
the problem truly is that there are players in brainking that sign for tourneis and then move every month so i am having problems with players that i invite for mega tourney wich got stucked in tourneis forever so i will have to ask the Good Fencer to release them .. ( one player started a tourney 5 yrs ago and he hasnt even finish 1 game that is ridicoulos .. those players should be banned from playing in tournament forever ! )
so do not worry about how many tourneis we can create but who is signed ...

FrancescoLR: I agree with Francesco. Besides, there're players that refuse to use auto pass in games where is possible and that's ridiculous. Auto pass was created specially for that players play more fast in particular situations, i guess, but many of these players don't use it, trying win for time-out or other strange reason. :(

Undertaker.:I'd vote yes to this one! 

FrancescoLR:  I think this discussion needs to stay focused to the tournament board tourneys that are open...  you can't control who signs up for every tourney (in all reality you can because you can manually boot someone from a tourney) which is your arguement; however you should be able to control how many tourneys a person has open at a given time.  I think 10 tournaments is very reasonable.  For those that want to start a ton of tournaments; they can start 10 every day and leave them open for a day...  or start one every day and leave them open for 10 days...  or whatever combination you can think of; but allowing people to leave potentially hundreds of tournaments is ridiculous.  I'll prove my point by starting a couple hundred tourneys and then I'll tell you to look at the tournament board.  WAIT...  go there now and you'll see it like that anyways because of a few people that create the same tourneys a hundred fold!

Instead of making this a general request for a limit on open tourneys; I think we should make it an opportunity to give one more reason to pawns to become a member...  make additional tourneys a perk to becoming a member!  For example:

Pawns are allowed to have 1 open tourney.
Bishops: 3
Knights: 5
Black Knights and White Rooks: 10
Black Rooks: 15
so on and so forth... 

This gives one more 'perk' to becoming a member while still allowing everyone to have open tournies.  More than fair.

What does this do to the tournament board?  I believe it will have less tournaments on the board which should have close to or possibly even more participation due to more members in a tournament  (Instead of 3 people in 10 tournaments you get maybe 7 people in 3 tournaments), thus allowing more tournaments to start!

ALSO:  Hopefully this will spur additional members to create unique tournaments which will spur additional people to look at the board more often instead of being flooded with the same thing again and again...  and again!  I hope this is seriously considered...  it wouldn't take much to code this (from my understanding) into BrainKing.  Long term it is one more marketing point (perk) to get people to consider a higher membership...  As a member of Brainking for nearly 3 years; I have become all but bored with the tournaments and believe it has something to do with the same small group of people creating the tournaments...

Another thought:  maybe we have Official Brainking tournaments once a month, once a quarter, or even once a year to see who the best is???  Then give brains or a prize (picture of a big blue ribbon or a gold medal!) on their profile...  further thoughts to think about...

Hope others chime in on this subject.

Thanks,

Phil (rednaz23)

rednaz23 says: "Another thought: maybe we have Official Brainking tournaments once a month, once a quarter, or even once a year to see who the best is??? Then give brains or a prize (picture of a big blue ribbon or a gold medal!) on their profile... further thoughts to think about..."

GREAT IDEA

aaru:  I guess you and I are the only one that care about tournaments and how it is structured.  It is becoming disappointing to see no one else cares that you can't find more than a few good tourneys to play...  Does anyone else care?  There are a couple of significant things wrong with the tournament board:

* The time over the deadline is too long; 29 days is unacceptable and people abuse it to keep their tourneys 'on top of the list' for as long as possible.
* People who can have 118 open tourneys (like one member right now) means there is no limit and it is being abused to inundate the board with their own monotonous tourneys.

To ensure a unique mix in the tourney board without overloading the board with these monotonous tourneys; I feel we can correct these two issues above and it should mitigate the current situation to have a unique mix which should satisfy more users without putting any of the tourney creating members out on a limb.  I hope this can be looked at and addressed.

Thanks,

Phil (rednaz23)

rednaz23: wrong my good friend .. i care a lot and if was possible i would have done my tourney in double elimination style .. i wanted different format too of tournament and you have no clue whats going on with my tourneis ( mega tourney ) . i invited pawns wich they are not playing any games but they cannot join tournaments because of players like that got them stuck forever . .. is because of those pple that lots of players cannot play any more tourneis ..
i asked Fencer and he will do something special just for that tourney ... just to let you kinow i sended more than 1000 invitations ... even tough i nam one of the most active players i never create tournaments ( i did just for record of moves ) and just now to give chance to have more players playing but is not easy ..
also you pointed just the tournament but if you see page of ponds then ...
i guess fencer should give "unlimited " power only to black rooks and limited the numbers of tourney for the rest .. and also i saw tons of fellowships with no players or non active players ...
but Phil remember that Fencer is only 1 person and he cannot do everything .... so i am sure given time he will do more things

rednaz23: Alot of people care you just don't realize who they are:))

rednaz23: Those 2 things are exactly what I suggested on March 22nd on this board (6 days ago). So there are more that would like to see that part of the site improved - we just have to hope that Fencer see's it as something that would help things also. (which would hopefully lead to more quality tournaments then a ton of less-quality tournaments)

coan.net:  Look at that... you did.  Glad you also care about it as well!  :-)