I appreciate the difficulties but there should be a penalty for someone with over a thousand time-out loses.
I suspect that they could just re-join under a new name
Originally posted by stevemcc I appreciate the difficulties but there should be a penalty for someone with over a thousand time-out loses.
I suspect that they could just re-join under a new name
yes and yes.
I would at least ban people with several incidents of massie timeouts from tournaments.
I don't think you can stop people manipulating ratings here, there are just too many ways to do it. For example, there's one individual who resigns all games except clan games, in order to keep getting easy games in the clans system. The ongoing request for a tighter rating floor seems not to be a high priority for the site owners.
Originally posted by Kewpie I don't think you can stop people manipulating ratings here, there are just too many ways to do it. For example, there's one individual who resigns all games except clan games, in order to keep getting easy games in the clans system. The ongoing request for a tighter rating floor seems not to be a high priority for the site owners.
I think I know who you mean
How about no reductions for time outs and resignations that would put a spoke in the wheels
Originally posted by padger I think I know who you mean
How about no reductions for time outs and resignations that would put a spoke in the wheels
That's a non-starter. Timing out or resigning are often done because of lost positions. If I outplay someone so badly that they don't want to play the game anymore, I want the rating points that I'm due. I also want to see their rating go down. (Which is fair, because I have to take that hit every time I lose).
On the other hand, if their rating is already at a floor, then I don't care so much about it going down further. I can usually see that the rating is already significantly lower than the playing strength.
Originally posted by BigDoggProblem That's a non-starter. Timing out or resigning are often done because of lost positions. If I outplay someone so badly that they don't want to play the game anymore, I want the rating points that I'm due. I also want to see their rating go down. (Which is fair, because I have to take that hit every time I lose).
On the other hand, if their rating is ...[text shortened]... her. I can usually see that the rating is already significantly lower than the playing strength.
You still go up they do not go down
Isn't it enough that you won ,do you also want to rub their noses in it by making them take a ratings drop
Originally posted by padger You still go up they do not go down
Isn't it enough that you won ,do you also want to rub their noses in it by making them take a ratings drop
Originally posted by BigDoggProblem No, it isn't enough that I won.
Yes, I want to rub their noses in it. 😀
With that attitude I can understand why people dump a load of games and then enter competitions that 200 and 300 below their proper ratings
I am surprised that you do not join them
Originally posted by padger With that attitude I can understand why people dump a load of games and then enter competitions that 200 and 300 below their proper ratings
I am surprised that you do not join them
No, you're not surprised. Your post is manufactured "outrage".
I have no interest in beating a bunch of people below my own strength. Taking rating points only means something when it's from a player around my own size or bigger. In that case, damn straight I like rubbing their nose in it (and vice-versa...don't know how much clearer I can make it...)
That's really what this is about for you, isn't it? You are so concerned about getting whipped by underrated players that you will ruin ratings for everyone else if only to avoid it. Well, guess what? You can't avoid it. As has already been suggested in this thread, a strong player can create infinite new accounts and evade all of the attempts to force him to play up.
Losses via timeouts
17 May '15 22:29
Back to Top