Moderator: Tournament Directors
GrimReaper. wrote:i agee this is a very bad idea but sadly its not against the rules.
At least 50% of the spots available must be for open/public sign-ups, and not filled with special invitations.
Marfski wrote:There have been tournaments offered before for just cooks, etc. Since this has been allowed, I think this issue needs to be clarified because of the recent glut of 2500+ tournaments.
I don't think this sudden flood of tournaments for just 2500+ is a good idea either and I don't know why the same thing couldn't be accomplished in call outs or some other forum.
I think you should put a poll up Bones and have people vote about possibly reviewing/revising the tournament handbook rules.
Bones2484 wrote:You bring up a good point about "cook" tournaments. Honestly, I don't really feel as though they should be allowed if we are also trying to stop "2500+" ranks as well. I don't want to be a hypocrite.
BaldAdonis wrote:Thos tournaments are all made by the same person. Did you consider just asking him to stop?
Night Strike wrote:Bones2484 wrote:You bring up a good point about "cook" tournaments. Honestly, I don't really feel as though they should be allowed if we are also trying to stop "2500+" ranks as well. I don't want to be a hypocrite.
One difference: There are 250 players over 2500 points, but there are nearly 2000 players under 800 points. That's nearly 10 times as many cooks eligible for a cooks only tournament than for a colonel+ tournament.
That's all I'm saying for now.
Night Strike wrote:Bones2484 wrote:You bring up a good point about "cook" tournaments. Honestly, I don't really feel as though they should be allowed if we are also trying to stop "2500+" ranks as well. I don't want to be a hypocrite.
One difference: There are 250 players over 2500 points, but there are nearly 2000 players under 800 points. That's nearly 10 times as many cooks eligible for a cooks only tournament than for a colonel+ tournament.
That's all I'm saying for now.
I sure hope I misunderstood what you said because I have a lot of respect for you, your score the tourneys you have run.
Soldier4Christ wrote:if you dont like the tourny...just dont join it...whats the problem?? make your own i did
Blitzaholic wrote:why do 90% of the people that win tournies feel good when the top 10% in scores are never in them, do you feel like you really competed agains tthe best players on the site? cause you have not
Optimus Prime wrote:Blitzaholic wrote:why do 90% of the people that win tournies feel good when the top 10% in scores are never in them, do you feel like you really competed agains tthe best players on the site? cause you have not
I call fucking bullshit on this. Blitzaholic, let's see you bring your boys and play in a real tournament that is set up to actually find the best players and see how you fare, shall we? I bet at least half of you won't make it out of the first round against some of us "lesser" folks. There is so much more involved with playing in a tournament that you've never even thought about.
"Haven't played against the top 10%, so you haven't played the best,".... what a joke!
White Moose wrote:Point Restictions have been here for a long time, it's used by lots of organizers. Just because this restiction only allows the top 300 on the scoreboard to join... well.. how is this diffrent to use a 1200p requirement? It's still a point requirement. Sure, it's open to more than 300 players. But that shouldnt matter. I'd say, either take away all point restrictions or leave it as it is.
Bones2484 wrote:Well... Rule number 3 of the handbook:At least 50% of the spots available must be for open/public sign-ups, and not filled with special invitations.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users