alanback:
I got stuck to similar situations before. Some players are really slow on playing, and for this reason, I play only elimination tournaments now...

alanback: I'm still playing in a tournament that started October 2005!!!! It's called "the first doubling cube tournament" or something like that.

I think tournaments probably should blow up after a year and running games continue on as "friendly's" on the assumption that nobody cares about the result any more.
:)

grenv:
I don't think this is a solution because the "spirit"of tournaments is to have a winner. i think that paying members should self restrict their games to a number they are capable of playing.I've met with players having 1000+ games going on. I don't blame them,they want to have alot of games to play.That's their problem.But when it comes to having timed out 2 or three times,then they should understand that they have to lower down the number of games going on...

lostpawn: Sure, but in the history of sports, games etc... is there any precedent for a competition lasting more than a year?

My fault I guess for joining a tournament with a 7 day limit... but it was more than 3 years ago when I didn't know any better.

Even something simple like starting the next round when winners are known in the current round would probably make a big difference.

And, yes, 1000 games seems silly - how is that fun? Surely 100 is enough so you always have a turn waiting - more seems like a waste.

grenv: how would a player feel if they were fast movers but a tourney they were about to win got cancelled because of a time limit. I feel they might be very displeased about such an event and it is not fair on them.