Originally posted by roma45You present no rational argument why proposed changes to the system won’t work. You impugn me personally on the grounds that I have played fewer games than you at RHP (having no idea what team tournament experience I might have acquired elsewhere). You have been at RHP nearly seven years and played over 8,000 games -- yet it still hasn’t dawned on you that the playing field is tilted? A blind man could see that as soon as he walked in the door. (FYI I played on the Cambridge University chess team, the field at RHP is tilted and I saw that as soon as I walked in the door. Does that satisfy your curiosity?)
just curious you have been here FOUR YEARS and manged 32 games with 1200 moves and have NEVER finished a clan challenge.
but you seem to have a lot to say on fairness, but still won't condemn the easy riders and those who hand them points.
As for condemnations, see my reply to VR.
EDIT: Just curious: you are not presently a member of any clan. Why does this matter to you?
Originally posted by Very RustyCan you give some rational argument why proposed changes to the system won't work?
... I don't think your solution will work either. My opinion of course.
Do you have a response to my example of Clans A, B, and C ? Does that not make it clear that gross wins is the wrong metric for determining champions in a league such as this where teams are of very different sizes and there is no fixed schedule of matches?
An open comment to all concerned:
Since some posters here insist on drawing legalistic comparisons, allow me to point out that in a country governed by the rule of law, it is unacceptable to punish anyone for actions which were not defined by law as criminal at the time an action was performed, and ex post facto laws are invalid. There is no rule, either of FIDE or at RHP, which forbids resigning a won game, therefore, there is no legally comparable case to be made for punishing players who throw games.
I fully agree that throwing games in order to manipulate the system is poor sportsmanship and have said so more than once.
Defining the resignation of a won game as forbidden is a non-starter. Even very strong players sometimes make surprisingly big mistakes, including misjudging a won position to be lost.
Originally posted by moonbusso you have played for cambridge uni team, well done. and of course you can prove that by?
You present no rational argument why proposed changes to the system won’t work. You impugn me personally on the grounds that I have played fewer games than you at RHP (having no idea what team tournament experience I might have acquired elsewhere). You have been at RHP nearly seven years and played over 8,000 games -- yet it still hasn’t dawned on you that t ...[text shortened]...
EDIT: Just curious: you are not presently a member of any clan. Why does this matter to you?
you knew right away, but played a massive 32 games in four years, been in a clan a matter of minutes, never finishing a challenge.but come up with what's wrong with the whole site.
curious you do a big reveal now, just as the pressure is on Robbie and co.a blind man can see they are cheating.
No internet chess site in the world is free from manipulation, but the easy riders and co have gone way beyond trying to gain an advantage.
i have said this many times, i will not re-new my sub [like others] or play in clan games again until a message has been sent to those who are obviously cheating, don't give me the old anyone can resign at any time
Originally posted by moonbusyour example of clans a b c etc made no sense
Can you give some rational argument why proposed changes to the system won't work?
Do you have a response to my example of Clans A, B, and C ? Does that not make it clear that gross wins is the wrong metric for determining champions in a league such as this where teams are of very different sizes and there is no fixed schedule of matches?
all you are doing is deflecting what this thread is about
buy a sat nav, take your ideas to "site ideas" let the cobwebs gather.
you keep harping on about no laws getting broken,
another comparison for you, imagine you are in a long queue, then someone skips it, goes right to the front, others in the queue start telling the guy to get back, i assume you tell every one "its not illegal to skip the queue, let him stay where he is, lets try and fix the problem to why there is queues, perhaps getting windows a b and c etc opened so queues are non more. it's the queues fault afterall not those who have no manners and skip it"
you must have been last in the queue at cambridge when common sense was being handed out.
Originally posted by moonbusSir,
Can you give some rational argument why proposed changes to the system won't work?
Do you have a response to my example of Clans A, B, and C ? Does that not make it clear that gross wins is the wrong metric for determining champions in a league such as this where teams are of very different sizes and there is no fixed schedule of matches?
See roma 45 reply to you in this thread. I completely agree with him. Also you've been listed on here for 4 years have played a total of 32 games, that is an average of 8 games per year!! not even a game a Month!!! I take it chess isn't your favourite game. Yet, you have all the answers as to how the clan system can be fixed. Well Done!!!
Kind Regards,
Sincerely,
-VR
Originally posted by moonbusSir,
An open comment to all concerned:
Since some posters here insist on drawing legalistic comparisons, allow me to point out that in a country governed by the rule of law, it is unacceptable to punish anyone for actions which were not defined by law as criminal at the time an action was performed, and ex post facto laws are invalid. There is no ...[text shortened]... layers sometimes make surprisingly big mistakes, including misjudging a won position to be lost.
This is not a court of law, it is a chess site. RHP have and will continue to make changes in the rules. Have been doing so since I joined back 2006. It is to make improvements to the site. Getting rid of people throwing won games, and resigning games before a challenge has even gotten under way, would be a big improvement, in my opinion.
Kindest Regards,
Sincerely,
-VR
Originally posted by Very RustyYou think playing fewer games makes my proposals less worthy of consideration? "Treat everyone equal" indeed !
Sir,
See roma 45 reply to you in this thread. I completely agree with him. Also you've been listed on here for 4 years have played a total of 32 games, that is an average of 8 games per year!! not even a game a Month!!! I take it chess isn't your favourite game. Yet, you have all the answers as to how the clan system can be fixed. Well Done!!!
Kind Regards,
Sincerely,
-VR
Originally posted by moonbusSir,
@roma45
Just because it made no sense to you doesn't mean it made no sense. It's a microcosm of what's going at the clans section of RHP.
Since you resort to impugning me personally and challenging my credibility, I presume you have no rational argument against my proposals.
I am assuming not speaking for him that he considers with your experience on the site you are just not qualified.
Kindest Regards,
Sincerely,
-VR
Originally posted by Very RustyApparently you have no constructive proposals of your own, just gripes about people abusing the system and scorn for anyone who proposes anything other than the ad hoc punitive measures you favor. Are you just waiting around for unknown 'improvements' to come about by magic or what? I see an ice berg dead ahead with no one at the helm and no captain on the bridge. Lower the life boats!
Sir,
... RHP have and will continue to make changes in the rules. Have been doing so since I joined back 2006. It is to make improvements to the site. Getting rid of people throwing won games, and resigning games before a challenge has even gotten under way, would be a big improvement, in my opinion.
Kindest Regards,
Sincerely,
-VR
Originally posted by moonbusSir,
You think playing fewer games makes my proposals less worthy of consideration? "Treat everyone equal" indeed !
I live by that quote: "Treat everyone equal" your proposal does not do so. Wanting to allow people who have been in collusion "Easy Riders", Breaking Bad, Anti Metallica, & Arrow, keep their points which were given "Easy Riders", on a silver platter.. There is no doubt that Suspensions are in order.
I have said before I do not have the solution, but then neither do you. Two of us have already said so, and I am sure there will be more who disagree with your logic. Perhap send your proposal to Admins and see what they think of it! Perhaps 8 games per year would enough in your eyes to play! Give me an amount of games you think to be fair? 20, 30, 100, 200??? on and on I could go.
Kind Regards,
Have A Great Day,
Respctfully,
Sincerely,
-VR
I believe I may have found something which may prove useful, if only as boilerplate.
Have a look at this:
http://www.uschess.org/content/view/7538/35/
Scroll down to Standards Of Conduct item 6 c) and d).
Perhaps some similar wording could be incorporated into RHP clan rules. Proving intent in cases of infractions would be tough though.
Originally posted by moonbusThis is their main way of deflecting any questions and\or truths re their manipulating games and results along with sandbagging for years.
@roma45
Just because it made no sense to you doesn't mean it made no sense. It's a microcosm of what's going at the clans section of RHP.
Since you resort to impugning me personally and challenging my credibility, I presume you have no rational argument against my proposals.
Originally posted by moonbusWe can't implement those codes here as they would have to get rid of every metallica player and flunkies for breaking these ethics day in and day out
I believe I may have found something which may prove useful, if only as boilerplate.
Have a look at this:
http://www.uschess.org/content/view/7538/35/
Scroll down to Standards Of Conduct item 6 c) and d).
Perhaps some similar wording could be incorporated into RHP clan rules. Proving intent in cases of infractions would be tough though.