Tournament has players in who are offline

In our go club we have organized a few tournaments, but every time there are a bunch of people who time out and aren’t actually online. However, when you start a tournament it claims you hav to be on the page or be instantly disqualified.
These seem to contradict each other. What is going on, and how can we organize a tournament without this problem?

I’ve developed a tournament tool with BadukClub that allows you to hold an online tournament using OGS but where you can set different start times for each round and where you can allow a 15 minute window before a loss occurs (as an example).

It’s currently invite only because I’m it’s in active development and not ready to roam free unsupervised. But I’ve ran four 80+ person events with it successfully.

If your interested let’s schedule a time to video chat so I can learn more about your needs and answer any questions. You can pm me on here or email me


It’s a fairly small club with members who are hard to organize, i’m not sure adding another website will help. Maybe manual matchups would be better though, but I’m still wondering why the tournament page doesn’t work like it says it does.

Ah, you are making an observation about a potential bug. Here is the github, might be more useful for making a bug report:

The forum is fine too as the mods frequent it.

Good luck!

The github seems completely ignored, going by my previous bug reports there.

1 Like

Unfortunately this is a backend issue, which only our developer can fix. Can’t hurt to add it on github anyway, but indeed there are several problems with our tournament system and as far as I know anoek is planning to do a bit of a complete overhaul of the tournament code, but no idea about the ETA yet, sorry about that.

I am not completely sure I understand the issue and its implications for you, one of the more “obvious” workarounds seems to disqualify the players manually. I completely get that it is not ideall, but it’s the first thing that came to mind in case it is “good enough”