1. Subscribermoonbus
    Über-Nerd
    Joined
    31 May '12
    Moves
    8268
    08 Jan '17 07:56
    Originally posted by my2sons
    too complicated meaning open to collusion by clever manipulators such as yourself.

    We need a simple straightforward system with a clan review board in place to address issues such as collusion, sandbagging, etc.
    Then I suggest win ratio (percent wins).
  2. Subscriberroma45
    st johnstone
    Joined
    14 Nov '09
    Moves
    417108
    08 Jan '17 08:26
    Originally posted by moonbus
    Then I suggest win ratio (percent wins).
    so play one challenge, win it be on 100% then sit back for the rest of the year to be champions?
  3. Here
    Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    416756
    08 Jan '17 08:36
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    Yes this is a great point. Some mechanism would need to be used to make sure that players do not enter a clan with a vastly reduced rating to take advantage of the system. Perhaps the tournament entry rating could be used to prevent the player from playing anyone below that? In the case of players with a provisional rating they would need to complete their six games before their clan games counted.
    Ask Mctayto about tournament entry rating
  4. Here
    Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    416756
    08 Jan '17 08:38
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    Actual site formula utilised to project ratings. Thanks to moonbus.

    Hypothetical scenario.

    Clan A v Clan B

    1) robbie 1798 v mghrn55 1810: result 1/2 - 1/2
    2) tomeasyrider 1600 v hetrz van rental 1610: result 0-1
    3) settl 930 v suzzianne 1000: result 1-0

    The following formulas were copy-pasted from the RHP FAQ:

    New Rating = Old ...[text shortened]... two, + 19 for game three = +4 points for Clan A. (Do the math for Clan B.)

    Hope this helps.
    NO!!
  5. Here
    Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    416756
    08 Jan '17 08:40
    Originally posted by The Postman
    Yes, something does need to be done.
    There's a chap near the top of the clan ladder who has a all time high of 1647. Tournament entry rating of 1306 and actual rating of 1149.
    Manipulated by playing lowly ranked non subscribers and resigning after a few moves. Then playing clan games against players of the same (1149) ranking who are of course inferior ...[text shortened]... players.
    I think the tournament entry rating is a much better guide and should be used instead.
    In my proposal a player who resigns a game would have no reduction in rating
  6. Here
    Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    416756
    08 Jan '17 08:45
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    Its not too complicated at all, you are simply too dim. Can you tell us why such a system is open to collusion for it cannot be because its too complicated, infact its very simple. Your suggestion of a review board will not address the issue of those who sandbag and do not get caught, will it. We cannot constantly police the system, we need a system that is self regulating and that rewards clans for good play.
    It is too complicated and I think 90% of clan leaders would find it too complicated
    The trouble is you and maybe 1 or 2 others understand what you are going on about but that makes easier for you to manipulate it as you did last year
  7. Here
    Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    416756
    08 Jan '17 08:46
    Originally posted by roma45
    so play one challenge, win it be on 100% then sit back for the rest of the year to be champions?
    Very good point
  8. Subscribermoonbus
    Über-Nerd
    Joined
    31 May '12
    Moves
    8268
    08 Jan '17 10:59
    Originally posted by roma45
    so play one challenge, win it be on 100% then sit back for the rest of the year to be champions?
    Set an arbitrary minimum number of challenges/games to be completed. Already been suggested. Just read the previous posts.
  9. SubscriberMctayto
    Highlander
    Planet Earth
    Joined
    10 Dec '04
    Moves
    1037861
    08 Jan '17 11:10
    Originally posted by moonbus
    Then I suggest win ratio (percent wins).
    This method favours the game dumping antics of the unscrupulous metallica clan as they already have 75%+ win ratio every year despite supposedly fair challenges
  10. SubscriberMctayto
    Highlander
    Planet Earth
    Joined
    10 Dec '04
    Moves
    1037861
    08 Jan '17 11:11

    This post is unavailable.

    Please refer to our posting guidelines.

  11. SubscriberMctayto
    Highlander
    Planet Earth
    Joined
    10 Dec '04
    Moves
    1037861
    08 Jan '17 11:13
    Originally posted by padger
    In my proposal a player who resigns a game would have no reduction in rating
    What a plonker
    If you want your rating to remain at a given level simply resign all games where you are in a losing position. You actually think that is an improvement to go forward.
  12. SubscriberMctayto
    Highlander
    Planet Earth
    Joined
    10 Dec '04
    Moves
    1037861
    08 Jan '17 11:18
    Originally posted by moonbus
    Set an arbitrary minimum number of challenges/games to be completed. Already been suggested. Just read the previous posts.
    We are not looking for a way to put chains on the clan leaders
    All that is required is a way to make manipulation of the system an unviable option.

    A clan that dumps games to complete challenges should not benefit from this.
    A clan should not benefit from sandbagging.
    A clan should not benefit collusion.
  13. Subscribermoonbus
    Über-Nerd
    Joined
    31 May '12
    Moves
    8268
    08 Jan '17 11:292 edits
    Originally posted by my2sons
    too complicated meaning open to collusion by clever manipulators such as yourself.

    We need a simple straightforward system with a clan review board in place to address issues such as collusion, sandbagging, etc.
    The example of the hypothetical scenario based on net rating change is simple and straightforward: if your rating goes up, your clan's rank goes up; if you throw games (for any reason or 'rationale' whatever), your rating goes down and your clan's rank goes down, too. Simple. Straightforward. Neutral. If you don't understand the math, so what -- it's the same math running in the background already anyway for calculating individuals' ratings every day all day long.
  14. Subscriberroma45
    st johnstone
    Joined
    14 Nov '09
    Moves
    417108
    08 Jan '17 11:50
    Originally posted by padger
    Very good point
    I have another good idea
    We really need to sort out collusion once and for all
    A points removal from the protesters last year and a warning issued will stop it
    A vote should happen obviously those involved in the four clans will be banned from voting no accused can be on the jury under and circumstances
    Put integrity back then we can move forward

    Some of the ideas about formulas back no sense totally full of loop holes that's what some players want
  15. Subscriberradioactive69
    Fun, fun fun!!
    On the beach
    Joined
    26 Aug '06
    Moves
    68045
    08 Jan '17 11:57

    This post is unavailable.

    Please refer to our posting guidelines.

Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree