Originally posted by moonbusCould you explain why not
It wouldn't have the desired effect, for the same reason as treating thrown games as unrated. It would only make a mockery of the rating system.
If they could only drop 50 points below their highest rating they could discard as many games as they like they will still only drop 50 points
Now they can drop as many as 1000 points if they want to
they might accidentally win a games that sends them over their highest rating
So they would have a new highest rating
30 Mar 17
Originally posted by padgerSetting a floor would lead to rating inflation, as follows: one could challenge any player with a much higher rating, on the off-chance that one might draw (probably not win, of course)--such things do happen. This would increase one's rating considerably. But losing the game, or throwing it at any point, would never cost as much as the potential gain. If this were repeated over many games, it would render the rating system unreliable as a measure of player strength, as many players would become systematically over-rated.
Could you explain why not
If they could only drop 50 points below their highest rating they could discard as many games as they like they will still only drop 50 points
Now they can drop as many as 1000 points if they want to
they might accidentally win a games that sends them over their highest rating
So they would have a new highest rating
In order for the rating system to work properly, the cost of losing must be equal to the potential gain of winning, neither more nor less, with no ceiling and no floor.
The best we have now is to look at players' rating trends over several years; sudden drops tend to indicate sandbagging (but do not necessarily do so, as for example when someone is on holiday, forgets to set his holiday flag and has a string of timeouts).
30 Mar 17
Originally posted by padgerpadger leave me out of your crap
All I can say is if the floor was in place now Mctayto would be playing at rating much higher than he is now
I may have in the past played at a lower rating whereas now that is in the past
I do not throw tournaments whereas I may have pulled out of tournies in the past.
Flogging a dead horse is a waste of your time
Originally posted by MctaytoWell that would be nice to know if it is true
padger leave me out of your crap
I may have in the past played at a lower rating whereas now that is in the past
I do not throw tournaments whereas I may have pulled out of tournies in the past.
Flogging a dead horse is a waste of your time
Time will tell
- Joined
- 17 Jun 08
- Moves
- 179883
ELO, hopefully at the player level, maybe at the clan level, can assist with sandbagging
Particularly, if we set the player and/or clan ratings to a flat 1200 and allow them to adjust
Collusion requires a different treatment
I honestly believe it was done to make a valid statement... something's wrong here
Give the folks who have done this an improved system, that levels the playing field and addresses their concerns, and they won't feel the need for a repeat performance
A point rollback will bring their civil disobedience effort back into parity, and we go on from there
Originally posted by moonbusIt would apply to everybody who uses the current system to play with an artificial rating
It is a bad idea to make rules which apply to one specific person. Let's keep this impersonal and concentrate on fixing flaws in the system.
I only mention him because he advertises the fact that he sandbags
Originally posted by MctaytoThat's next to impossible.
padger leave me out of your crap
I may have in the past played at a lower rating whereas now that is in the past
I do not throw tournaments whereas I may have pulled out of tournies in the past.
Flogging a dead horse is a waste of your time
Where ever there is crap, your name can't be far off !! 😀
Originally posted by moonbusELO does away with sandbaggers, one or even two lopsided games in a challenge is not going to make that much of a difference, not like it does now. It would require an entire clan of sandbaggers for it to be effective.
There are better ways to deal with sandbagging than setting a floor (or a maximum drop).
Originally posted by robbie carrobieDon't tell me ,you are advertising for sandbaggers to fill your clan with
ELO does away with sandbaggers, one or even two lopsided games in a challenge is not going to make that much of a difference, not like it does now. It would require an entire clan of sandbaggers for it to be effective.
Originally posted by robbie carrobiei thought you left?
ELO does away with sandbaggers, one or even two lopsided games in a challenge is not going to make that much of a difference, not like it does now. It would require an entire clan of sandbaggers for it to be effective.
the ELO will not stop the three sister clan from dropping their pants to the easy riders,
you are so busted,
no amnesty
Originally posted by padgerIt is a bad idea to apply a rule to everybody which was actually designed for only one person (or a very small number of persons). That treats everyone as being on a level with the one who triggered the rule.
It would apply to everybody who uses the current system to play with an artificial rating
I only mention him because he advertises the fact that he sandbags