The section size also affects the number of games played. Assuming the section size is constant, the number of team players doesn't affect how many games each player playes - it is simply (games against each player) * (teams per section - 1).

Even playing only 50 moves a day is $0.50. Over a year that's about $180...

Why should Fencer put in extra effort to remove the Knight membership?
And besides, if the knight membership is just what someone wants, why take it away from them?

Well, if you are using auto-vacation and you end up not having to go, none of your games should "time out", and therefore no vacation days should be used.

The "main team" can be a different team for each person - it does define the team that is shown when going to that fellowship page, but you setting it only changes it for you, and not for everyone else.

Stevie: certainly ;-)

Yes, maybe that was it - multiple games in fellowship tournaments...

lol...I just checked in my fellowship and it only let me add Spider Line4 (which is the only team). So apparantly it still is only tournaments with corresponding teams... :-)

I thought you changed it so fellowship tournaments could be created with games that do not have the corresponding teams (ex: all games touranments)...

He did say "in one tournament of any game type" which does actually mean one total tournament, of any gametype.

It says in the name "Prize for Backgammon"...

I've only seen it on two - the Battleboats board, and this board. Since it's a Battleboats Tournament, why shouldn't it be on both?

Ok, it's also on BBW's Battleboats fellowship DB. Also an appropriate place - especially considering its his Battleboats fellowship.

Only the big boss can create a tournament within a fellowship. Anyone with a membership rook or higher can create their own public tournament - simply go to the "Tournaments" page (found on either left or top links, depending if you're using row or column layout), and there should be a link towards the top of the page that says "Define new tournament". From there, you can set up things like the game-type(s), description, time limit, membership levels, section size, start date, etc.

I noticed that when playing a team tournament game, there is no "Move and go to the tournament" selection at the bottom of the drop-down list. Is there a reason for this?

Also, the team tournament games in the member drop-down-list (the one that contains all of our games) are not marked with the *s like the regular tournament games. I think they should at least be marked somehow even if different from the regular tournament games.

We're moving, we're moving... :-)

ImUpChucKing: If a game were to time out on Satuday and it was Thursday (2 days away) but Saturday and Sunday were days off it would say there was 4 days until it timed out. In other words, days off and vacation days are added to the time left as necessary so the time left actually is the time left until time out.

21 days = 3 weeks. Each week has 2 days off, which really makes it 27 days. It is possible to have 10 days off (5 weeks of days off) during that 21 days, which will take it to 31. The only way it should be at 36 should be either site holidays or vacation days.

I'll refer to the 4th sentence of my post four posts down.

To what "silly games" are you referring?

What do you mean by "deliberately play slow"? Sure I could spend 16 hours a day on here and never have a move wait longer than a few hours between my visits to this site. But I can't see that happening. If you mean that I purposely play slower than I have to just to make people wait, that isn't the case. I am not going to start the discussion re: why I play the speed I play again - you can read all about it on the Brainking.com board.

You pestering is in fact not swaying me to play any of my games faster. And the more posts I have to reply to the longer all of my games will wait.

Btw, this is completely unrelated to tournaments.

IMupChucKing: Yes, if you have a higher rating that means you are better than me at that game. However, if you will reread my post, I said "Ratings aren't just to determine who is the best and who is better than who." The key word in that sentence being the word "just".

And how do you figure I said it like a robot? Because I used a higher level of vocabulary than you think I should have?

Steve: I have the same right to post on any board I like, just like everyone else (who hasn't been banned) - including you.

Ratings aren't just to determine who is the best and who is better than who. They are mainly to give a numerical representation of that player's skill at that game. This makes it useful to determine the relative skill of everyone, and to find appropriate opponents.

No, it isn't. I'm just giving my opinion on how I believe it should (and should not) work. If you (or anyone) wants to run it however you like, I won't complain about it.

Say there are 10 players. How do you know who is 10th, and who is 9th, and who is 8th...and who is 3rd? You could check the S-B, or point total in each player's section. But first you'd have to make sure all the sections were the same size (not too hard). You'd also have to assume that a player's performance in their section would be identical if they were against different players, which is impossible to assume. The only fair way to do something like that would be to have every player play a game against every other player in every single game.

Yep, it'll let unrated players join if BKR is set to 100 <= BKR <= 100 (just went and checked...)
:-)

I assume you mean his prize tournament? It has been set up to only allow pawns, so no one that isn't a pawn will be allowed to enter... :-)

I see 20 black pieces, but only 5 white pieces...I think it was a problem before when one point had more than 15 pieces on it (or something like that) but i thought it was fixed...
This game

Well in that case it's either 2 white and 1 black, or 1 white and 2 black (and some people will get each). I'm not sure exactly how it works, but i read somewhere it's done using "Shurig tables". Not sure what those are though! :-)

The "Threaded Discussion Boards" is on Fencer's list, along with many other things :-)

First he is going to finish, test, and release BK 2.0, and then work on such other things. However, he views this as a game site, with discussion boards as an added feature (which it is) so i wouldn't count on discussion boards being high up on his list ;-)

What was your problem with the tournaments? Finding a link to the tournament page of a particular tournament?

Perhaps it would be clearer if the rounds were at least divided somehow (like with a Horizontal Rule), or possibly even put on seperate pages?

Maybe it could be set up as a poll - Real-time play, or not. If enough people want it, go for it. If not enough vote for it to make it worth the time and effort, it might not be such a good idea. (Although this whole topic about real-time games really isn't relevant to the topic of the board ;-) )

lol - yes, i was wondering the same thing BBW :-)

Yes. If you set it to two-game matches, it will start two games against each person. So with 4-player sections, each player will get 6 new games (2 with each of the other three in the section).

Before the Gothic Chess Prize Tournament (the $250 one) it was completely random. Now, i think it does someting like this:

The highest rated player is put into section 1.
The next highest rated player into section 2.
etc, etc (as many sections as there are)

I'm not sure if it keeps going like that to fill all the spots, or if it's random at some point, but if you look at some recent tournaments, you'll notice the highest rated players are generally at the top of the section, and the lower rated players are at the bottom.

I'm pretty sure it's entirely random.

There are still games remaining in your section - you have to wait for your section to finish before you can join another.

Or, you can message Fencer and he will mark you as eliminated from the tournament so you can join another.

All the ones that had been created either started or finished by now. Until someone starts another one, there won't be any more :-)

Yes - until your section finishes, and you do not advance. However, as Fencer said with pawns, if you have no mathematical chance to win the section, you can let him know and he will mark you as eliminated so you can join another tournament of the same type.

The problem i can see with the creator being able to kick players out is as follows...

My brother plays the game StarCraft (if anyone is familiar with it). Anyways, quite often, people will create a game, and ban anyone who joins for no reason at all. The game sits there forever, never starts, and takes up space both on the server and the list of games screen.
I can see this happening here too...someone will create a tournament, kick everyone out who joins, and it will never start - just remain on the list forever.

Although, i still think its a good idea, because that likely would not happen very often.
And I agree with the private tournaments as well - good idea :-)

It has never happened to me, but i have seen a few cases where people were allowed to join when they shouldn't have (especially when unrated is set to no, it seems unrated players can still join sometimes).

For me, it always gave me the message something like "You cannot join this tournament because your [insert game here] rating (####) is out of the defined range".

The tournaments are not started automatically - that is the job of the tournament creator :-)

When you want to start it, click the button that says "Close for Signups" on the tournament page. That will take you to another page in which you will be allowed to start the tournament. Remember you have to click two buttons (one to close sign-ups and another to start the tournament) before it will start.

And also when the first round completes, if there is to be a 2nd round, that is your job to start as well. It will not start automatically ;-)

It would just be a good idea to not start the tourney until you have either at least 4 rooks signed up, or more than 4 other players - the more the safer you are! :-)

(or, if you wanted to, you could check all the pawn and knight profiles to see how many games they had, and see which ones will not have room for it) :-)

grant: Considering it is 2 games against each player, and you will probably be in an 8-person section (based on the # of sign-ups) you could have as many as 14 games in that tournament.

Even so, the teams have to agree before they can have a tournament. If one team doesn't agree to play, there won't be a tournament.

I have created my 5th Spider Line4 tournament a few days ago. It's open for everyone to join, and will probably start around the 21st of June.

I'm assuming the teams will have to agree on how many players, and only that many players will play. Although, it would be possible with uneven players. And why do the ratings have to be equal? It will never happen exactly, and even if it does the ratings are never a completely accurate representation of a player's ability until they play infinite games :-)

Sometimes (not often) the tournament creator will post a message here or on another board announcing the tournament. If they do not do that, the best way it to just periodically check the "Tournaments" page found on the left of this page. Many tournaments have all games included, and many others are a single game, or a few games. You might have to check through them to find the one(s) you want.

However, being a brain pawn (non-paying member) you are limited to one tournament entry at a time, and cannot join another tournament until either your section completes and you do not move on to the next round, or the tournament finishes :-)

How is it hurtful and demeaning to them? He simply said they were irrelevent to the discussion. What if he said that the millionaires on this site were irrelevent to the discussion (like he said)? Would that be hurtful and demeaning to them to?