Originally posted by padgerspot on plus you are totally correct the mighty ELO ststem will do nothing to stop collusion and using dead players. which ruined last years challenge.
Then they wont care will they ?
only a honour system will work, but alas some have no honour on here so it must be enforced.
dead players must be not allowed to be selected
any player losing by timeout without moving points do not count
collusion points gifted last year to be removed a warning issued to every clan on here if it happens again.
bulk wins are the only way the title should be decided, a few 1900 players want quality games, must think they are better than us lowbies, play 10 quality games a year to win title? dream on
- Joined
- 17 Mar 10
- Moves
- 626123
07 Jan 17
Originally posted by moonbuslook at the greater good if i am quoting it right... or applying it right...
Point four is equivalent to "bulk wins," which favours large clans which play many games at short time limits. Not a level playing field.
EDIT: Point two "The way to stop sandbagging would be the player who resigns there would be no rating change," makes no sense. If resigning a game does not drop a player's rating, what would? Only checkmate??
in rugby, the longest winning streak is held by new zealand. however they qualify it by stating "in top tier rugby"
That is because NZ have 18 consecutive wins.... (vs top teams) because in reality 🙂 the best streak is actually by Cyprus with 24.... and anyone who follows rugby would say: Does Cyprus even play rugby??
Bulk wins can be rewarded for it shows greater participation into the clan system... (my opinion)
Why should a clan of 2... win all their challenges... but only play 2 challenges a year on the 21 days per move timebank.... qualify to be top of whatever table gets created.
- Joined
- 17 Mar 10
- Moves
- 626123
07 Jan 17
1 edit
Originally posted by roma45you must also bare in mind though roma.... in normal play, i have played a guy who refuses to lose properly... once I am in a winning position he says well played and never moves again....
spot on plus you are totally correct the mighty ELO ststem will do nothing to stop collusion and using dead players. which ruined last years challenge.
only a honour system will work, but alas some have no honour on here so it must be enforced.
dead players must be not allowed to be selected
any player losing by timeout without moving points do not co ...[text shortened]... must think they are better than us lowbies, play 10 quality games a year to win title? dream on
its like he would rather his losses be by timeout... as if he never lost fairly....
that loop hole may creep into the clan system...
ie: guys.... looks like we will lose this next challenge... everyone stop moving and let them skull us....
Edit: Sorry I missed the words "without moving". Then I can agree to that....
however another loop hole there is possible too... will say how in next post...
- Joined
- 17 Mar 10
- Moves
- 626123
07 Jan 17
So I have 4 guys for a coming challenge.... two of them never move and they are weak...
I then set up a challenge where my weak guys take on their best guys and my best guys take on two of their weaker guys... the challenge looks fair as it looks like we will each win 2 each... and so the tie could end 4-4... however my weak guys never move and get skulled... so instead of 4-4... it ends 4-0 to us, because of that loop hole.
unless of course non movers are not allowed to be picked to begin with...
loop hole continued... the guys move to set up the tie then suddenly "life happens" and they are away for a few months...
i guess that committee thing could help. I just worry about who ends up on such a committee.
i don't partake to the forums much but it seriously feels that if one of these regulars in the forums comes up with a genuine great idea... their "enemy" on here just shoots it down...
so its not about the idea... just about who is saying it.
a committee may end up "finding" outcomes based on personal feelings rather than what is right....
Originally posted by CostadHow did it end up 4 -0 to you if you won 2 and they win two on timeouts ?
So I have 4 guys for a coming challenge.... two of them never move and they are weak...
I then set up a challenge where my weak guys take on their best guys and my best guys take on two of their weaker guys... the challenge looks fair as it looks like we will each win 2 each... and so the tie could end 4-4... however my weak guys never move and get skulled.. ...[text shortened]... committee may end up "finding" outcomes based on personal feelings rather than what is right....
- Joined
- 17 Mar 10
- Moves
- 626123
Originally posted by padgerits hypothetical if one were to apply zero points for non movers.
How did it end up 4 -0 to you if you won 2 and they win two on timeouts ?
4-4 current system.
4-0 hypothetical system of zero points for non movers
Edit: Was trying to illustrate how a clan leader may use such a rule to their advantage. (the loop hole effect)
Talking about those who oppose bulk wins
It might favour large clans doing lots of challenges but don't forget they actually have to win the challenge before they can benefit
It's easier to win 8 out of ten than 800 out of a 1000 games
Lemon drop has proved one man clans can compete
Costad it's impossible to close every loop hole but if we close the biggest collusion and dead players it will be a start
Originally posted by roma45We are still waiting on your proposals on how to deal with sandbagging, players prematurely throwing games to artificially reduce their rating in tournaments, clans dumping challenges and players throwing games when challenges are numerically decided. Players who are inactive rarely happens and are hardly relevant at all unless of course you have statistics which demonstrate how significant they are.
Talking about those who oppose bulk wins
It might favour large clans doing lots of challenges but don't forget they actually have to win the challenge before they can benefit
It's easier to win 8 out of ten than 800 out of a 1000 games
Lemon drop has proved one man clans can compete
Costad it's impossible to close every loop hole but if we close the biggest collusion and dead players it will be a start
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI thought I had covered most of this in my proposal
We are still waiting on your proposals on how to deal with sandbagging, players prematurely throwing games to artificially reduce their rating in tournaments, clans dumping challenges and players throwing games when challenges are numerically decided. Players who are inactive rarely happens and are hardly relevant at all unless of course you have statistics which demonstrate how significant they are.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieClans dumping challenges and players throwing games when challenge has been decided.
We are still waiting on your proposals on how to deal with sandbagging, players prematurely throwing games to artificially reduce their rating in tournaments, clans dumping challenges and players throwing games when challenges are numerically decided. Players who are inactive rarely happens and are hardly relevant at all unless of course you have statistics which demonstrate how significant they are.
I will step up and say this.
There is really nothing wrong with that !!
This is clan challenge management plain and simple.
And I am sure lots of clans do it.
If anyone thinks this is a reportable transgression, report this to site.
Their answer ?? Stop wasting our time !!
I offered a remedy to the decided challenge issue.
An update to the rating formula by lowering the K-factor (that's what they call it in the ELO system).
This will shrink the rating change in such a case.
As to dumping clan challenges ??
This is simply retooling for the new year.
Clan challenge management !!
Also, clans can hang on to won challenges so that they are put in the books in the new year.
Really !!
If there is nothing left to play for in the clan challenge standings ??
Why would any clan cash in a won challenge on Dec 31st when they can wait 24 hours and cash it in on Jan 1st ??
I'm not a clan leader.
But this isn't string theory !!
There are opportunities for improvement in the clan system.
But let's not waste Russ' time on this stuff.
Russ is a website manager.
Not an emotional therapist !!
Originally posted by padgerFor robbies benifit
It appears there are 4 things that are to be considered
1 Collusion
2 Sandbagging
3 Dead players
4 Points awarded for a win
1 The way around collusion would be that a clan cannot challenge the same clan in a 90 day period
2 The way to stop sandbagging would be the player who resigns there would be no rating change
I would like to see that one back ...[text shortened]... ded 6 - 4 winning clan would get 5 + 6 = 11 points losing clan 4
Draws would be just games won
Originally posted by roma45No, and that is exactly why bulk wins is an unfair metric. A clan which plays 50 games and wins 49 of them has a season score of 49, whereas a clan which plays 1000 games and wins only 50 of them wins the championship if only bulk wins are counted.
Talking about those who oppose bulk wins
It might favour large clans doing lots of challenges but don't forget they actually have to win the challenge before they can benefit ...