Before the rating system was implemented, most amateur tournaments were open tournaments. So, invariably, a seeded player would play some beginner and give him a lesson. All beginners understood the process and most advanced players did as well and treated their opponents like gentlemen/gentlewomen.
The new system MIGHT be better, but for all the ugly appendages hanging onto the new system.
My biggest concern is that people don't understand the preparation that must be done before entering a tournament. A 4 year old Suziki violin student doesn't start with a Paganinni violin piece.
When I was 14 I was looking for a sport to replace baseball, as I was bored being on rotation as a pitcher. So, I bought a cheap tennis racquet and hit some for about two weeks with a friend. He wasn't much better than me, but bragged that his brother was a great athlete who was going to the Naval Academy. Well, I really had no respect for tennis players at that point as it wasn't a traditional sport, so I told my friend to bring him on, in my best impression of G.W. Bush.
Needless to say, his brother thoroughly cleaned my clock as he was about 4 levels above me. BUT, he inspired me to play better.
So, when a 3.0 player plays in a 3.0 tournament, is he modeling 3.0 players, is he learning 3.0 faults, is he listening to 3.0 advice from other 3.0s, etc.?
If you want to get better, and are a low rated player, then get lessons, model the BEST players, train hard, and TEST your training occasionally with a tournament. Fortunately the beginner doesn't have to be cannon fodder for an open level player, so playing an open tournament is a bit silly when you are a 3.0. Play a 3.5 tournament instead.
j/k
-Robert