Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Help Forum

Help Forum

  1. Standard member orfeo
    Missing 285 + 1
    29 Jun '04 08:04
    Much as I applaud the idea of enabling people to decide a minimum and maximum rating when creating an Open Invite, can it be altered so that this does not AUTOMATICALLY exclude provisional players?

    I can understand that there may be people who will choose to exclude provisionally rated players, on the grounds that a p rating might not be a totally accurate reflection of ability, but it's a bit disconcerting to be faced with a whole string of open invites that are closed off to provisional players who actually have a fair idea of their ability - after only 6 games I have a reasonable idea of where my rating will stabilise.

    Plus I have already seen examples of NON-provisional ratings that are clearly not an accurate reflection of ability, eg someone who used to have a high rating taking a plunge after being unexpectedly away and being timed out by a number of opponents.
  2. Standard member skeeter
    515 + 30 days
    29 Jun '04 08:24
    Originally posted by orfeo
    Much as I applaud the idea of enabling people to decide a minimum and maximum rating when creating an Open Invite, can it be altered so that this does not AUTOMATICALLY exclude provisional players?

    I can understand that there may be people who will choose to exclude provisionally rated players, on the grounds that a p rating might not be a totally accurate ...[text shortened]... ting taking a plunge after being unexpectedly away and being timed out by a number of opponents.
    Good point and well made. gets a rec.

    skeeter
  3. Standard member SirLoseALot
    Shut Gorohoviy!
    29 Jun '04 18:21
    Agreed!Second rec
  4. Subscriber Russ
    RHP Code Monkey
    29 Jun '04 18:44 / 4 edits
    I did fear the open invite filtering would cause problems - and it does appear to have done so.

    Problem 1 - obviously asking for games with 1900 players when your own rating is in the 1200s makes no sense. The game is unlikely to be accepted and just clogs up the open invites system.

    I will probably apply a forced maximum 'minimum' limit of your own rating plus 100.

    Problem 2 - Provisional players are aggrieved that they are excluded from many of the open invites. But, they could easily create an open invite of their own. So, open invites for which provisional are excluded will be hidden from provisional players.

    I will assess the situation again after these changes are in place.

    -Russ
  5. Standard member SirLoseALot
    Shut Gorohoviy!
    29 Jun '04 19:15
    Originally posted by Russ
    I did fear the open invite filtering would cause problems - and it does appear to have done so.

    Problem 1 - obviously asking for games with 1900 players when your own rating is in the 1200s makes no sense. The game is unlikely to be accepted and just clogs up the open invites system.

    I will probably apply a forced maximum 'minimum' limit of your own ra ...[text shortened]... ional players.

    I will assess the situation again after these changes are in place.

    -Russ
    Good idea.You'd think people have a little more common sense,but....no....
  6. Standard member orfeo
    Missing 285 + 1
    30 Jun '04 02:49
    Originally posted by Russ
    Problem 2 - Provisional players are aggrieved that they are excluded from many of the open invites. But, they could easily create an open invite of their own. So, open invites for which provisional are excluded will be hidden from provisional players.

    [/b]
    It IS true that provisional players can create their own open invites. However they run the risk of few other players (p or non-p) wanting to accept those invites! Plus if they attempt to set a rating limit, you will automatically have the odd situation of a provisional player excluding other provisional players.

    My issue is not purely "provisional players are aggrieved that they are excluded". As I already said, I think that players issuing an invite should have the right to exclude provisional players if they want to. But as the system currently stands, a decision to set minimum and maximum rankings automatically carries the consequence that provisional players are excluded. What I am suggesting is that the two decisions (setting rankings, and excluding provisional players) should be unlinked.
  7. Standard member orfeo
    Missing 285 + 1
    30 Jun '04 03:11
    Originally posted by Russ
    Problem 1 - obviously asking for games with 1900 players when your own rating is in the 1200s makes no sense. The game is unlikely to be accepted and just clogs up the open invites system.

    I will probably apply a forced maximum 'minimum' limit of your own rating plus 100.

    Just thought of a problem with this - what about Set Piece games, such as the series of odds games that flexmore has been offering? In that case, having a rating considerably different from your own DOES make sense.
  8. Standard member mrmist
    Moo
    30 Jun '04 07:27
    I notice that, in the open invite list, the "accept game" link is only shown for games that I can accept.

    Would it be better maybe to just only show those games in the list?
  9. Standard member gameover9
    11 games waiting
    30 Jun '04 14:25
    put it but on there but forget the provo stuff
  10. 30 Jun '04 14:30
    I can't believe I'm saying this but I think Russ should take away the invite filtering feature I begged so much for him to put in place. It has obviously become the latest method for arrogant people to strut their stuff.

    It wouldn't bother me if it was a bunch of 1800+ ranked players blocking people like me from challenging them. Frankly, I'm not a masochist anyway. What bothers me is that it looks like a small group of (at best) mediocre players who have more ego than brains and persistently spam the invite section with ridiculous challenges.

    I honestly don't know what pisses me off more right now... having to ask Russ to remove a feature I asked him to put in... or finding out that the jerks I come to RHP to get away from are here too...
  11. 01 Jul '04 17:16
    I think the filtering is a great idea -- its just being misused by some.

    I think it is fine that someone wants to prevent me from playing against them due to my rating, but then it would be nice if I do not see that open invite. Is this possible? It seems that it would resolve most problems for players with lower ratings like mine seeing too many "unacceptable" invites.

    What to do then about players with higher ratings? Perhaps they could filter the open invites that they will see?
  12. Standard member flexmore
    Quack Quack Quack !
    01 Jul '04 19:46
    Originally posted by orfeo
    Just thought of a problem with this - what about Set Piece games, such as the series of odds games that flexmore has been offering? In that case, having a rating considerably different from your own DOES make sense.
    absolutely - this system gets me some great games!

    maybe asking for players more than 100 points above your rating could be only for set piece games?
  13. 05 Jul '04 16:19
    Well, I really appreciate the rating filtering in the open invites and want to thank Russ for implementing it....so, THANKS!

    Just an idea:Russ, u could make it where players must allow people their own rating to be able to accept their game...for example, in my case I am a 1500 player, so at the highest I could do >1500 or >1600 if I got in the 1600's...and so on...