Games below 5 moves - revisited

I had made a thread about this a year ago, showing my concerns and asking the question
whether an appeal could be made against this ruling in specific cases.
Thread 172805
I asked the question whether the rule also counted checkmates. It was unclear at that point.

Since then, the question has been answered, unfortunately in the expense of Bart Kortum (Pion Van Oranje)
Thread 174199
This game was not counted, even after appeal,
so a 6-6 draw resulted in one clan losing 11 points.

So that query is settled (unfairly) however there's still one more issue associated with this rule...

What happens in the event of a tie?

Say for example in a 6-man challenge, ONE game ends prematurely,
which is voided and so the challenge now only has 11 valid games.

If in these 11 games the challenge is a tie (say 5 wins each and a draw)
do both clans get 5 and a half points each?

Are half points even possible in challenge results?

Forgive me if this has been addressed before, but I couldn't find it anywhere.

Many thanks,
~64

this topic is of no interest
put it to bed

the rule is probably not often an issue as if two players are reasonably competent and closely matched which they should be more than before under the new rules i had thought checkmates in such few moves are less likely unless one player is drunk or there is some collusion going on

Originally posted by @64squaresofpain
I had made a thread about this a year ago, showing my concerns and asking the question
whether an appeal could be made against this ruling in specific cases.
Thread 172805
I asked the question whether the rule also counted checkmates. It was unclear at that point.

Since then, the question has been answered, unfortunately in the e ...[text shortened]... give me if this has been addressed before, but I couldn't find it anywhere.

Many thanks,
~64

The score is the determiner. If one clan wins 5 loses 5 and draws 1 with the 12th game ruled null, the the challenge does end in a tie and each clan receives 5.5 points.
This is the way it has always been.

The rule currently in force says games with under 4 moves are rule invalid.
Since fools mate is the only way to lose a challenge in 3 moves, perhaps this isn't such a trajedy if it is not counted.

Originally posted by @shortcircuit
The score is the determiner. If one clan wins 5 loses 5 and draws 1 with the 12th game ruled null, the the challenge does end in a tie and each clan receives 5.5 points.
This is the way it has always been.

The rule currently in force says games with under 4 moves are rule invalid.
Since fools mate is the only way to lose a challenge in 3 moves, perhaps this isn't such a trajedy if it is not counted.

I doubt that Bart Kortum would think it isn't a tragedy.

Anyway, on the topic of half points, you say it's always been this way
but I am yet to see an example of this occurring...

Could it simply be the case that it's never happened before?
Or has it happened and you can provide an example?

Originally posted by @64squaresofpain
I doubt that Bart Kortum would think it isn't a tragedy.

Anyway, on the topic of half points, you say it's always been this way
but I am yet to see an example of this occurring...

Could it simply be the case that it's never happened before?
Or has it happened and you can provide an example?

A tie is considered a half point...both sides get 0 points.
You get 1 point for a win.

If the match ended with 5 wins and a draw with a game that was kicked for being too short of the required moves, as you example stated....the points awarded would be
+5 for the 5 wins + 0 points for the draw + 0 points for the game that was kicked.
This means each team would be awarded 5 points for the match.

This is the way it has always been done.

Make your mind up shorty, you said each clan receives 5.5 points before,
but now they are receiving 5 points each... which of those ways has it always been??

Look, all this is proving is the solution is not a clear one, hence my initial query.

Is it the end of the world? Is it a major issue? Of course not.
It is, however, further evidence that the game removal rule introduced last year was clearly a rushed job.

All checkmates should count, yet <4 move ones are not.
Half points should be given, yet this has never happened.

Originally posted by @64squaresofpain
Make your mind up shorty, you said each clan receives 5.5 points before,
but now they are receiving 5 points each... which of those ways has it always been??

Look, all this is proving is the solution is not a clear one, hence my initial query.

Is it the end of the world? Is it a major issue? Of course not.
It is, however, further evidence th ...[text shortened]... ould count, yet <4 move ones are not.
Half points should be given, yet this has never happened.

NO, I said the match would be split. The half points are not awarded because they TIE
You ONLY get points for WINS. They have NEVER issued half points.

Originally posted by @64squaresofpain
I had made a thread about this a year ago, showing my concerns and asking the question
whether an appeal could be made against this ruling in specific cases.
Thread 172805
I asked the question whether the rule also counted checkmates. It was unclear at that point.

Since then, the question has been answered, unfortunately in the e ...[text shortened]... give me if this has been addressed before, but I couldn't find it anywhere.

Many thanks,
~64

Stupid clan scoring system

Originally posted by @padger
Stupid clan scoring system

The clan system itself isn't so stupid.
For the most part, I'd say it works.

It's just little, unnecessary flaws like this which let it down.

With regards to the < 4 full moves ruling:
- all checkmates SHOULD count
- half-points SHOULD be given in tied challenges (otherwise, you have a perfectly valid game that doesn't contribute to the scoring!)

Originally posted by @64squaresofpain
The clan system [b]itself isn't so stupid.
For the most part, I'd say it works.

It's just little, unnecessary flaws like this which let it down.

With regards to the < 4 full moves ruling:
- all checkmates SHOULD count
- half-points SHOULD be given in tied challenges (otherwise, you have a perfectly valid game that doesn't contribute to the scoring!)[/b]

It was brought in to stop collision too many dead players losing and others timing out against one oerticular clan
Unfortunately admin hadcto rule all games under four moves void. Sure they said it would be too complicated to do and allow check mates to stand.
Again I think they posted the stats for wins in four moves or less it was so small it was not worth the extra work.
Unfortunately your clan has lost because of this.
Did you send feedback?.

Originally posted by @64squaresofpain
The clan system [b]itself isn't so stupid.
For the most part, I'd say it works.

It's just little, unnecessary flaws like this which let it down.

With regards to the < 4 full moves ruling:
- all checkmates SHOULD count
- half-points SHOULD be given in tied challenges (otherwise, you have a perfectly valid game that doesn't contribute to the scoring!)[/b]

I think the solution to this quandary may be quite simple.
By way of example that I have intentionally exaggerated, I propose a solution to the way points are rewarded.

A 10 player challenge where 18 of the 20 games did not last the full 4 moves.
One clan won the other 2 games.

Under Russ's current solution, the winning clan gets 2 points.
I suggest that the winning clan still gets the 20 points for winning the challenge.
The short games would be null and void only for determining the score.
But NOT for the awarding of the points.
This would cleanly eliminate the half point dilemma.
And it would still preserve the size of the pot.

When 2 clans agree to a 10 player challenge, they have clearly the set the prize.
One clan or the other gets 20 points for winning.
Or each clan gets 10 points for a drawn challenge.
It would be the same as if 18 of the 20 games ended in draws.
The value of the challenge is still 20 points.

I think Russ took the solution 1 step too far.

Originally posted by @mghrn55
I think the solution to this quandary may be quite simple.
By way of example that I have intentionally exaggerated, I propose a solution to the way points are rewarded.

A 10 player challenge where 18 of the 20 games did not last the full 4 moves.
One clan won the other 2 games.

Under Russ's current solution, the winning clan gets 2 points.
I sugges ...[text shortened]... The value of the challenge is still 20 points.

I think Russ took the solution 1 step too far.

no they should not count if few moves, it is either because one player has gone awol and a timeout or such a gross mismatch that one player can beat the other so quickly probably due to sandbagging, or as was happening it finished after only a few moves due to collusion

Originally posted by @wycombe-al
no they should not count if few moves, it is either because one player has gone awol and a timeout or such a gross mismatch that one player can beat the other so quickly probably due to sandbagging, or as was happening it finished after only a few moves due to collusion

I think you are missing my point.
In my proposal, the games don't count towards deciding the outcome of the challenge.

But the challenge is worth the number of players x 2.
That should not be affected.
Short games < 5 moves would be treated same as draws.
This would solve the issue of dealing with 1/2 points when awarding the points at end of challenge.

but then in the situation that was happening easy riders would still win as they would make sure they had enough games scoring to win but would also reap the benefits of those games that were rigged as they get still win overall and get the points