14 May 08
I think repetitive sandbaggers should be treated the same as engine users, as they're pretty much used to accomplish the same goal, winning lots of tournaments and scalping points.
Users like User 261696 and User 222345 being prime examples. Players of obviously at least 1700 strength, winning tournaments left and right far below their rating.
It's one thing to timeout and come back, but you don't have to steal other players' tournament wins, which these players seem to be happy about doing.
In real life, players like these would be kicked out of a tournament, then probably blacklisted from playing in future tournaments.
At the very least, someone needs to be watching for players like these (another reason for tournament moderators) don't get away with this sort of thing.
14 May 08
Originally posted by GalaxyShieldI agree that sandbagging is a problem that needs to be dealt with, but I'd prefer less drastic measures than you propose.
I think repetitive sandbaggers should be treated the same as engine users, as they're pretty much used to accomplish the same goal, winning lots of tournaments and scalping points.
Users like User 261696 and User 222345 being prime examples. Players of obviously at least 1700 strength, winning tournaments left and right far below their r ...[text shortened]... ke these (another reason for tournament moderators) don't get away with this sort of thing.
Tournament moderation (1) requires another site volunteer and (2) is subjective. I would not want to see a legitimately improving player get kicked off the site just because they won some tourneys while their rating was catching up to their new skill level.
Instead, I propose two changes:
1) An experience requirement for banded tourney entry. Don't allow a player to enter a banded tournament until they have finished say, 50 games on the server [the number can be adjusted; the idea is to let the rating level off a bit after the provisional period.]
2) Rating floors. After a player plays X games [say, 30] at a certain rating class [every 100 points], they have a rating floor 100 points below that class. For example, if a player's rating holds over 1300 for 30 games, they have a fixed rating floor of 1200. Their rating can no longer drop below 1200, no matter how many games they lose [or draw to lower-rated players].
This would set an objective standard and not require the services of another volunteer. Also, it would stop a player's rating from falling too far below their true skill level if they have to leave the site for awhile and time out a lot of games.
14 May 08
1 edit
Originally posted by GalaxyShieldUser 261696 in Page 2 of Thread 80413 admitted what he did. Basically, he won a bunch of tourneys two years ago when he first started playing. He has not sandbagged [as far as I can see] since then.
I think repetitive sandbaggers should be treated the same as engine users, as they're pretty much used to accomplish the same goal, winning lots of tournaments and scalping points.
Users like User 261696 and User 222345 being prime examples. Players of obviously at least 1700 strength, winning tournaments left and right far below their r ke these (another reason for tournament moderators) don't get away with this sort of thing.
If we're going to knowingly let 3b) banned users back on, then I see no reason why this guy should be hassled further.
14 May 08
1 edit
Originally posted by GalaxyShieldI like the way it was suggested in USCF: Create a permanent rating floor by rounding highest rating down (ex: a 2050 rated would become 2000 then subtract 200 points, making it inpossible for a 2000 player to ever play in banded tourneys below 1800. If that player ever reaches 2100 his permanent floor would become 1900.
[b]I think repetitive sandbaggers should be treated the same as engine users, as they're pretty much used to accomplish the same goal, winning lots of tournaments and scalping points.
Users like User 261696 and User 222345 being prime examples. Players of obviously at least 1700 strength, winning tournaments left and right far below their rating.
14 May 08
Originally posted by SwissGambitYou seem to not understand this. Sandbagging is when a high rated player drops down and starts playing at a lower level, so this idea won't have any bearing on 'legitimately improving players'.
I agree that sandbagging is a problem that needs to be dealt with, but I'd prefer less drastic measures than you propose.
Tournament moderation (1) requires another site volunteer and (2) is subjective. I would not want to see a legitimately improving player get kicked off the site just because they won some tourneys while their rating was catching up ...[text shortened]... heir true skill level if they have to leave the site for awhile and time out a lot of games.
Although I agree with you, the actual banning of these players could prove difficult. I can't see how you can actually ban 'sandbaggers' as you could probably never prove their intentions...
Your idea in point 1 is ridiculous, because some people actually subscribe because they want to play tournaments - so that would never be implemented.
The rating floor idea has been discussed many times before and is the only idea IMO that has any merit.
14 May 08
Originally posted by GalaxyShieldAs they are letting cheats back into RHP and also allowing certain users to have miltiple accounts, I feel it is unlikely for the banning of sandbaggers.
I think repetitive sandbaggers should be treated the same as engine users, as they're pretty much used to accomplish the same goal, winning lots of tournaments and scalping points.
Users like User 261696 and User 222345 being prime examples. Players of obviously at least 1700 strength, winning tournaments left and right far below their r ...[text shortened]... ke these (another reason for tournament moderators) don't get away with this sort of thing.
I still think a minimum tourney entry level based on your highest ever rating should come into play which knackers the sandbaggers.
14 May 08
Originally posted by GalaxyShieldRec'd. At a minimum they ought to take the "glory" out of it by having a ratings floor on what banded tourney wins are displayed in your profile--say not displaying tourney wins in banded tournaments more than 200 points below your all time high rating.
I think repetitive sandbaggers should be treated the same as engine users, as they're pretty much used to accomplish the same goal, winning lots of tournaments and scalping points.
Users like User 261696 and User 222345 being prime examples. Players of obviously at least 1700 strength, winning tournaments left and right far below their r ...[text shortened]... ke these (another reason for tournament moderators) don't get away with this sort of thing.
My impression is that nothing is ever going to get done about this, because it is perceived as being a small problem that only effects an occasional tournament, and that most of the banded tournaments are "working properly". Perhaps what is needed is a strong player who can handle an absolute TON of games, to time them all out and then go take on ALL of the low rated banded tournaments. Civil disobedience RHP style--driving home the point.
14 May 08
Recc'ed by me too.
When I challenge people I always check so their skill is not 2000 and their rating 1000. I don't want to give away my rating points near to free.
I cannot be choosy in tournaments. There I have to play with opponents where their rating is not reflected by their true skill.
I'm very sorry that I don't have any remedy though.
14 May 08
1 edit
Originally posted by GalaxyShieldRec'd...I agree with you, with the exception of actually banning. Some you would have no problem with because it is quite obvious by all that they are sandbaggers!
I think repetitive sandbaggers should be treated the same as engine users, as they're pretty much used to accomplish the same goal, winning lots of tournaments and scalping points.
Users like User 261696 and User 222345 being prime examples. Players of obviously at least 1700 strength, winning tournaments left and right far below their r ke these (another reason for tournament moderators) don't get away with this sort of thing.
With others it would be close to if not impossible to with out a doubt prove they were sandbagging, due to gameload, sickness, or just plain bored with the game for a period of time.
However these people as you said should not be allowed to go into tournaments, especially banded ones, where they have already established a rating beyond the banded tournament rating.
It is ridiculous to see someone who has won a 1500-1650 tournament, then later to see they have won a 1300-1450 tournament as an example of what I mean.
14 May 08
Originally posted by CrowleyLook at RussellR's case. He started out with a low rating right from the provisional period. He then won a ton of low-band tourneys. His graph around that time would look exactly like that of a rapidly improving player.
You seem to not understand this. Sandbagging is when a high rated player drops down and starts playing at a lower level, so this idea won't have any bearing on 'legitimately improving players'.
Although I agree with you, the actual banning of these players could prove difficult. I can't see how you can actually ban 'sandbaggers' as you could probably never ...[text shortened]... oor idea has been discussed many times before and is the only idea IMO that has any merit.
Except that he admitted that he threw games in the provisional phase, to keep his rating lower. Throwing games to lower your own rating is sandbagging, regardless of whether you have an established rating or not.
Proposal 1) would not keep new players from playing tournaments. There are still lots of open tourneys they could join.
14 May 08
2 edits
Originally posted by SwissGambitThis has been discussed before, I completely agree with implementing a rating floor, as did many others at the time. But it just kind of died, and nothing more was said on the subject.
For all of you who rec'ed the OP; would you really rather ban people instead of implementing rating floors?!
I think that the powers that be, must believe that the rating in the last 100 days works ?
Keep in mind as things stand "Sandbagging" is not an offense on RHP. Problem it would be too hard in many cases to determine if the person was indeed sandbagging.
14 May 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasBut there is a remedy - rating floors!
Recc'ed by me too.
When I challenge people I always check so their skill is not 2000 and their rating 1000. I don't want to give away my rating points near to free.
I cannot be choosy in tournaments. There I have to play with opponents where their rating is not reflected by their true skill.
I'm very sorry that I don't have any remedy though.
Once a player establishes a 2000 rating, he should not be allowed to drop below 1900. [Or we could use the 200 point difference USCF uses and floor him at 1800.]