Originally posted by Marinkatomb What would you suggest to sort it out?
That is the problem, unscrupulous leaders will always win out as the lax leaders do not research the challenge on offer and the site can't impose limits on matchups.
If 2 leaders are willing to set up a lopsided challenge then the site should not stop the match.
This in effect makes it impossible to police and leaves the door open to the unscrupulous leaders with fair minded leaders suffering as a consequence.
Reality dictates that fair challenges overall give a 50/50 result therefore if the entire tables were fair we would have all clans tied for first place 🙁
Originally posted by Russ The other significant change is that games must be played beyond move 8 if a draw is to result in any points being allocated.
So 9 moves and the draw is legit, for points?
I don't think that is high enough. Lets get at least up into the 20's with that one.
I would prefer over 30 moves, which would cut down on pre-arranged draws.
I am a relative newcomer to the site so I may be talking rubbish, or repeating things which have been done over the years but here goes:
1.Surely the most important part of a clan challenge is to win it? The stats can be displayed in order of "games won" which is the one I would use.
2.Could not the "draw" issue be resolved by changing the scoring system? I.e a 6 all draw resulting in 3 points for each clan (not 6)?I realise this would introduce half points, but that is how chess works in the actual world.
Sorry to waffle on,but none of my opponents are online at the moment, And the missus is watching the silly "x" factor!!- Think I'll go to the pub
Originally posted by venda I am a relative newcomer to the site so I may be talking rubbish, or repeating things which have been done over the years but here goes:
1.Surely the most important part of a clan challenge is to win it? The stats can be displayed in order of "games won" which is the one I would use.
2.Could not the "draw" issue be resolved by changing the scoring system? I. ...[text shortened]... t the moment, And the missus is watching the silly "x" factor!!- Think I'll go to the pub
you made a lot of sense. be forwarned that this type of behavior is not tolerated and makes you subject to a warning and possibly removal
Originally posted by Russ The series of consultation votes last month illustrated how closely opinion was divided on some of the proposed changes to the clan tables, so we are not expecting everyone to warm to the updates.
What we do have now is a table focusing on annual position using net points as the default table view, rather than the gross wins from the start of time we had b ...[text shortened]... is that games must be played beyond move 8 if a draw is to result in any points being allocated.
This sucks. I agreed to have clans listed by yearly net points on the clan pages but all the other changes stink. This site needs to quit making all these changes, and most are for the worse.
Since I was a BIG player in helping make changes, here goes my thoughts on it. I have said from the onset that I believe that the current ranking system should at the very least have a link to go back to show all time points. With that being said, What has been arranged is an improvement over what was simply due to the fact that all clans will have a shot at taking first each and every year.
The draw situation: simply put, to create "preplanned" draws at 8 moves, would cost each participant its own rating, since all ratings are effected after only 3 moves. While there may be some who want to effect their personal rating for this, there are not enough to make cheating the system a viable move. 8 moves should be more than enough.
I have yet to see an oversight team developed (yes another MOD team). It may be still prove to be necessary.
As for challenges, well we could force them down to only match like rated players, but this really takes away from those who want to do creative challenges. It will also eliminate the ability to set up full clan challenges, as these were fun for a number of clans. (The original mega challenge). It is very difficult to find 2 clans with the same amount of players, all with the same ratings, but rather easy to find clans with similar average ratings but many players inside it with very different ratings.
As these are the big changes that were really looked for, I'd say it was a good job for what has been implemented, and hope to see the tweaks go in soon. The only thing that should have been effected are the all time points, and was shown won easily.
Originally posted by KJCavalier Since I was a BIG player in helping make changes, here goes my thoughts on it. I have said from the onset that I believe that the current ranking system should at the very least have a link to go back to show all time points. With that being said, What has been arranged is an improvement over what was simply due to the fact that all clans will have a shot ...[text shortened]... only thing that should have been effected are the all time points, and was shown won easily.
Any of these changes made or proposed do not take into account the deliberate reduction in rating by means of resigning games within a challenge as the outcome has already been determined.
This in effect permenantly keeps players in these clans at a rating far below their ability thereby giving an elusion of fair challenges.
Originally posted by Mctayto Any of these changes made or proposed do not take into account the deliberate reduction in rating by means of resigning games within a challenge as the outcome has already been determined.
Even if it was possible to fix that for clan games then those same players would enter tournaments and resign those games early. The effect on their rating for clan match-ups is the same.
It doesn't matter how many moves have to be played out. If a player resigns a winning position you'll only pick that up by having human eyes look at the game (the winner is hardly likely to raise the alert). But who's to judge why a player resigns? Maybe they are struggling with their gameload...pressure at work means they know they won't be able to play a game out and so resign as a courtesy...who's to say?
Originally posted by Gixxer Even if it was possible to fix that for clan games then those same players would enter tournaments and resign those games early. The effect on their rating for clan match-ups is the same.
It doesn't matter how many moves have to be played out. If a player resigns a winning position you'll only pick that up by having human eyes look at the game (the ...[text shortened]... resign as a courtesy...who's to say?
Most of you know how I feel about the changes and how it has helped the clans who have manipulated the challenges in their favour. Using a net figure will ensure this goes on. Of course it will be harder to manipulate, as Russ has made a few changes, but I am sure some clan leaders will find a way. Any clan who features in the top section will try their best to stay there, but with net results being the method used I expect some will do their best to get imbalanced challenges in their favour. Challenges based on average last year figures would help clan leaders spot imbalanced challenges, but will that ever happen? It doesn't look like it. 🙁
Oh, and one more thing. Net figures could mean a one or two man clan could go top! And that would be daft. Gross would stop this. Or clans should be a minimum number of players, say 10.
Originally posted by adramforall Thread 130155 makes its possible to police.
You would only replace one flawed system with another, and all I need to do to break it is ensure that my rating was always below where it should be. As I win clan games and my rating gets closer to it's true level, I sign up for an octet tournament and resign the games early.
The draw situation: simply put, to create "preplanned" draws at 8 moves, would cost each participant its own rating, since all ratings are effected after only 3 moves. While there may be some who want to effect their personal rating for this, there are not enough to make cheating the system a viable move. 8 moves should be more than enough.
You may find those who agree to draws at move 9 to be OK, I do not. 8 moves certainly is not enough to stop pre-arranged draws! It is quite obvious in Tournaments & Clan games when this is done, certainly changes the results in both.
Clan challenge table update
13 Oct '10 17:52
Back to Top