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

Site Ideas Forum

  1. 25 Mar '17 12:56
    Okay, here it is... Sandbagging and Collusion

    Potentially the ugliest thread on the Site Ideas Forum

    We need to condense what we've been talking about down to a few simple actions that RHP can articulate in the spirit of fair play

    Let's do this
  2. Subscriber moonbus
    Uber-Nerd
    25 Mar '17 13:23 / 1 edit
    One clan member has stated more than once that he considers it fair play to resign games regardless of board position, once a challenge has been decided. He calls this 'clan management.' I for one consider this argument to be subterfuge.

    Whatever the motive, the effect is the same: namely, whenever a player resigns a game which, if played out might have been drawn or won, his rating is artificially lowered and no longer reflects his true playing strength. This gives him an unfair advantage over some other player whose rating does accurately reflect his playing strength.

    This issue had far-reaching consequences for the course of the 2016 season; it was this which led some clans to engage in collusion in order to demonstrate how easy it is to manipulate the system. What the colluding clans did was not different in kind, but only in degree, to the practice of 'clan management.'

    In case that wasn't clear enough, I'll reduce it to one sentence: collusion is not the cause of what's wrong here, it's a reaction to the practice of 'clan management.'

    Clean up the first issue, and the symptom will disappear of itself.
  3. Subscriber shortcircuit
    The Energizer
    25 Mar '17 14:31
    Originally posted by moonbus
    One clan member has stated more than once that he considers it fair play to resign games regardless of board position, once a challenge has been decided. He calls this 'clan management.' I for one consider this argument to be subterfuge.

    Whatever the motive, the effect is the same: namely, whenever a player resigns a game which, if played out might have b ...[text shortened]... ice of 'clan management.'

    Clean up the first issue, and the symptom will disappear of itself.
    I consider your opinion to be just that....YOUR opinion.
    Who said your opinion mattered more than any other?
    You popped off quite a while back that the action was not legal under FIDE or USCF.
    It is NOT illegal, and clan chess is a different animal anyway.
    It is a battle where strategy is involved, just as in the game itself.
    In this case it is clan management.

    So tell me, do you have an opinion on collusion?
    Haven't heard you speak at all to that.
    Why not? Do you condone cheating?
  4. 25 Mar '17 15:16
    As most of the sand bagging is done by people with ratings below 1400 I suggest ,as I have said before ,that anyone who has a rating below 1400 should not get a reduction in their rating for resigning games
    That would in my opinion and it is my opinion will stop it at a stroke
  5. 25 Mar '17 17:09 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by padger
    As most of the sand bagging is done by people with ratings below 1400 I suggest ,as I have said before ,that anyone who has a rating below 1400 should not get a reduction in their rating for resigning games
    That would in my opinion and it is my opinion will stop it at a stroke
    First of all, I consider all the complaints about sandbagging and resigning games to collect the clan challenge ppints to be nothing more than hysterical wing flapping by a few individuals.
    Just a very few individuals.

    We all know who they are !!

    If we address the issues using proper analysis, we could easily find a solution for all the whiners that have been complaining about one clan in particular.

    I thought that Russ would have seen through that before he rewrote this whole system.

    I can present a set of solutions for all the issues out there.
    Except for one.

    The issue of collusion is a tougher nut to crack.
    And I have said at the outset that no matter how much effort is put into an IT solution, there will always be a need for human intervention.

    For example, forum bans.
    And clan suspensions.
    And other manual corrections elsewhere in the site that I don't know about.

    Clan suspensions and clan points rollbacks both have a precedent.
    It has been done before.

    As to solutions to the issues at hand, perhaps we should summarize the problems.
    We should not get into the validity of the issues even though some are baseless.

    But this is a summary of what I have heard.

    1 - problem with the scoring system. Meaning the way net points are awarded.

    2 - perceived problems with player rating manipulation commonly called sandbagging.

    3 - putting clan goals ahead of personal goals. In other words, players resigning clan games where the outcome has been decided.

    4 - collusion amongst amongst several clans to generate points towards one clan.

    That is what I see as the major issues.

    I am not going into solution mode here but just summarizing the main issues.

    Of course there are some secondary issues out there.

    And it should be noted that I am not yet proposing any solutions yet.
    But rather trying to frame the problem.

    Some will inevitably ask why I am coming out with this now.

    My answer is simple.
    No one did this before !!

    We collectively went about this all wrong.

    And what happened was that Russ got overwhelmed by the white noise in the original thread.
    And he then went into reaction mode.

    I am not yet sure exactly how the clan rating method will identify a winner in a clan season.
    And I don't want to judge it until I know exactly how it will work.

    But I think we could have improved the scoring system without tossing it aside.

    I will start a new thread with potential solutions to the scoring system as this thread is more of a problem statement.

    I think we can keep the clan rating as a piece of information.
    But not as a definitive metric of determining a champion.

    The nearest thing I see in the sports world is in golf.

    The PGA tour does have a world golf ranking that carries over from one year to the next.

    But the FedEx Cup is the defining metric of declaring a champion.

    Let's fix the net scoring system.
  6. 25 Mar '17 17:18
    Originally posted by mghrn55
    First of all, I consider all the complaints about sandbagging and resigning games to collect the clan challenge ppints to be nothing more than hysterical wing flapping by a few individuals.
    Just a very few individuals.

    We all know who they are !!

    If we address the issues using proper analysis, we could easily find a solution for all the whiners that ...[text shortened]... FedEx Cup is the defining metric of declaring a champion.

    Let's fix the net scoring system.
    Your comparison to the world of golf is mismatched
    The world ranking system is based on a points system over two or three ( not sure which ) years
    The Fedex cup is based on a points system of a year
  7. 25 Mar '17 17:18
    Originally posted by Giannotti
    Okay, here it is... Sandbagging and Collusion

    Potentially the ugliest thread on the Site Ideas Forum

    We need to condense what we've been talking about down to a few simple actions that RHP can articulate in the spirit of fair play

    Let's do this
    Doesn't have to be the ugliest thread.
    You could have renamed it Problem Statement.
  8. 25 Mar '17 17:19
    But I think we could have improved the scoring system without tossing it aside.
    I agree it is the only sensible way
  9. 25 Mar '17 17:23
    Originally posted by padger
    Your comparison to the world of golf is mismatched
    The world ranking system is based on a points system over two or three ( not sure which ) years
    The Fedex cup is based on a points system of a year
    My intention was to indicate that it is a rolling system.

    Your point is correct.
    The world golf ranking is not reset every year so that all golfers have the same ranking at start of season.

    That was my point with the clan rating.

    If a clan is declared a "winner" on Dec 31st based on their clan rating, they will start the new year on Jan 1st with the same rating.

    No clans will have the same start line at start of new clan season.

    With a points system, all totals are reset to 0.
    Every clan starts on same footing.
  10. Subscriber BigDoggProblem
    The Advanced Mind
    25 Mar '17 17:32
    Originally posted by shortcircuit
    So tell me, do you have an opinion on collusion?
    Haven't heard you speak at all to that.
    Why not? Do you condone cheating?
    He just addressed it, in the very post you quoted!

    You've trained your eyes to gloss over things you don't want to read.
  11. 25 Mar '17 17:46
    Some questions for Russ.

    1 - please provide a formula that determines a clan rating from one completed clan challenge to the next.
    Like you have for player ratings

    2 - do you declare a winner at the end of a clan season based on clan rating ?

    3 - what is your start point for each clan rating. Is it an average of the players in the clan ? Or a set rating ? 1200 ?

    4 - if one clan has a rating, say 300 points higher than another clan and they set a challenge, for the sake of argument a 1 player challenge where the 2 players have identical ratings. Would the higher rated clan gain far fewer rating for winning than the lower rated clan ? Because of the difference in the clan rating. Theoretically both clan should have a 50% chance of winning the challenge because the players involved have an equal rating. But the rating points awarded are distorted because of the clan ratings. Correct ?

    5 - what happens to the clan ratings on Jan 1st of each year. If the clan rating is the primary metric of determining a clan champion, then the clan champion will have a headstart at start of each new clan campaign. Simply put, if Clan A finishes 300 rating points ahead of Clan B on Dec 31st, they will start Jan 1st the same 300 points ahead. How do you define a start line ?

    6 - your comment on collusion under the new system will not work because one clan will be rated much higher than the other and therefore not have anything to gain is a false assumption in my opinion. 2 equally rated clans can collude just as easily as any other 2 clans. This is because a clan can regain their rating against other opponents and continue throwing challenges at their partner in collusion.

    I will have more questions as I become more familiar with the new metric.

    Finally, I do appreciate your efforts in improving this feature and this site.

    Thanks.
  12. Subscriber BigDoggProblem
    The Advanced Mind
    25 Mar '17 17:56
    Sandbagging would be much more difficult with separate individual ratings for clan play vs. tourneys and other arenas.

    Also, to prevent throwing games in already-decided challenges, the margin of victory must figure in how many points get awarded [or removed].
  13. Subscriber shortcircuit
    The Energizer
    25 Mar '17 17:57
    Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
    He just addressed it, in the very post you quoted!

    You've trained your eyes to gloss over things you don't want to read.
    No, he didn't address it. He asserted it came about because of it.
    READ what was said.
    The problem was not addressed, he acknowledged it existed.
    Big difference dog
  14. Subscriber shortcircuit
    The Energizer
    25 Mar '17 18:00
    Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
    Sandbagging would be much more difficult with separate individual ratings for clan play vs. tourneys and other arenas.

    Also, to prevent throwing games in already-decided challenges, the [b]margin
    of victory must figure in how many points get awarded [or removed].[/b]
    On your first point...sure it would be for difficult....but we didn't get these separate ratings in the "solution", did we??

    You people kill me with your twisted panties over deleting unnecessary game.
    If would want them to be necessary, award extra points for them.
    Case closed.
  15. Subscriber BigDoggProblem
    The Advanced Mind
    25 Mar '17 18:04
    Collusion is tougher to prevent than sandbagging. At the least, it can be made more difficult; the ELO system means there is less to be gained from beating an already-low rated clan.

    However, it's always possible to set up a two (or more) tier system to get around this: one tier feeds the primary clan, while the other feeds the tier one clans. This is nothing new: similar individual rating boosting schemes have played out here and elsewhere ad nauseum.

    Perhaps a rule, that no more than 10% of your total point gain in a moving 3 month window can be from any single clan, would help. [numbers can be adjusted if needed]

    I think determined collusion can beat any system of rules; in extreme cases, arbitration / intervention is needed.