ryan, can't the tables made be continous??? in the area that people are in.

Now it it really s*** well is not optimal :)
I fell short of 1700 at 1680 or so, and it the senso of scoring it really isn't smart to play on 1500 tables. Should I now stop playing and wait them to appear??

to get +200 on a current table limit is kinda hard, you see it now at the top players, who scratch at the 1900 while the limit is 1700.

So having a gap of 200 between tables just makes it a *real* gap, that perm. seperates player groups...

(Yes I know I could get at 1700 be going 1st. But that chance is only 20% otherwise it would go far worse.)

fuzzy:
Why do you mind spending about 10 games to get back to 1700 tables? The amount of games played doesn't count into your scoring. All you lost is some games. I know this is annoying. I made a post about elo some days ago. I am sure you read it fuzzy. ;)

algois, yes I read it, it was a very smart post, indeed :)

Well I'm pretty sure when playing 10 games at 1500 tables, my score will very likely to be 1620 or so, because:
* This may sound egomaniac, but I play slightly better than the average 1500er person.
* nevertheless going at 1700 from 1500 would require to get 1st 2 or 3 times in a row. Which is something I can hardly archieve without a lot of luck.