Hello, Maybe the decisions have all been made by now, but as one who is probably in the category of not playing actively on the ladder, I would like to be on record with being quite satisfied with the way it is now, and also sure that whatever Richard comes up with will be equally satisfactory. For me, the ladder is nice to have, knowing that there is a game available to me whenever I request it. Having hit a busy stretch in my other activities lately, I haven't availed myself of that opportunity much of late, but that does not indicate that I don't appreciate it just the way it is. Thanks, Jeffrey From: blind-chess-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:blind-chess-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Roderick Macdonald Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 10:40 PM To: Blind-Chess Mailing List Subject: [blind-chess] Ladder Aloha from Hawaii, and belated Happy Thanksgiving. My personal thoughts on the ladder: I think that the Ladder was quite popular when it was first introduced, and having a yearly "Champion" perhaps helped keep the interest. But once that idea was dropped things seemed rather tame. One thought: why play someone in the Ladder when you could play the same person in a "Friendly" game? It might be possible to change the Ladder format. For example, rank everyone according to their playing strength (rating), and the top 5 are "Division A", the next 5 "Division B", and so on. (Or have 8 or 10 in a Division). The periodic rankings would remain in the same order for the year, but beside each player's name would appear their starting rating, current rating and game results, and at year's end each division would have a Champion based on the year's difference in their playing strength - their rating went up "x" points. Players would be allowed to challenge any player on the list who happened to be free at the time, or was willing to play more than one game at a time. An idea for thought. Another idea, in addition to or perhaps to replace the Ladder: A team tournament. Everyone who wished to play coudl play. Once all have signed up, they are divided into "East" and "West" based on the longitude of where they lived, and then each side ranked according to their rating. Each player plays two games against his or her counterpart on the other team, once with each color, starting 3 months apart. Then after six months the same is done for "North" and "South", with a player's team depending on latitude. At the end of the year we have the standings of four teams, and each player has played four games against two opponents of approximately the same strength. More ideas? Rod