Instead of yet another year of debates regarding the tactics used to gain points on the net points clan list and sandbagging to reduce ratings how about this for a suggestion:-
If an opponent resigns a message is displayed for the winner:-
"Do you accept this resignation y/n"
If the answer is yes things continue as normal.
However if the answer is no the game is declared void.
No points are awarded for that game.
No change to the ratings for either player.
No score for the game in a clan challenge.
The game is automatically transferred to a separate file"void games" for anyone to view.
@venda saidI am afraid this could be used another tactic or strategy by certain people.
Instead of yet another year of debates regarding the tactics used to gain points on the net points clan list and sandbagging to reduce ratings how about this for a suggestion:-
If an opponent resigns a message is displayed for the winner:-
"Do you accept this resignation y/n"
If the answer is yes things continue as normal.
However if the answer is no the game is declared vo ...[text shortened]... challenge.
The game is automatically transferred to a separate file"void games" for anyone to view.
They are already using the 3 move rule as a strategy or tactic to win challenges. Lets not give them more ammunition to use.
-VR
@venda saidVoiding games does not solve the problem and cheats a winner out of earned points.
Instead of yet another year of debates regarding the tactics used to gain points on the net points clan list and sandbagging to reduce ratings how about this for a suggestion:-
If an opponent resigns a message is displayed for the winner:-
"Do you accept this resignation y/n"
If the answer is yes things continue as normal.
However if the answer is no the game is declared vo ...[text shortened]... challenge.
The game is automatically transferred to a separate file"void games" for anyone to view.
@venda saidInteresting.
Instead of yet another year of debates regarding the tactics used to gain points on the net points clan list and sandbagging to reduce ratings how about this for a suggestion:-
If an opponent resigns a message is displayed for the winner:-
"Do you accept this resignation y/n"
If the answer is yes things continue as normal.
However if the answer is no the game is declared vo ...[text shortened]... challenge.
The game is automatically transferred to a separate file"void games" for anyone to view.
I was just looking a clan game where white moved Nce5 to capture black’s queen… and then immediately resigned a strong position.
@divegeester saidIt's a sad state of affairs when the net points list is more important than playing chess.
Interesting.
I was just looking a clan game where white moved Nce5 to capture black’s queen… and then immediately resigned a strong position.
I'm almost certain that would be the reason for the resignation.
Perhaps if my suggestion of offering the winner options to void a game and creating a file for such games would show how common this practice was.
We can't criticise clans for using the system like this as it doesn't contravene the rules but I do think it goes against the ethics of the site and chess in general.
- Joined
- 19 Oct 06
- Moves
- 122570
@venda
I think your “Voiding” suggestion has some merit. Someone commented that it would just introduce a new opportunity for ‘gaming the system’ in a different way. We should explore how it could be abused, in case it has unintended consequences, but I have to say it seems to do the trick. I understand that the declared logic for allowing the tactical resignations is to let the clans that are ‘hungry for net points supremacy’ get on with more challenges - because it is the slow drip of small(ish) wins or draws that notches up the net points. This is good for the community because it encourages and rewards these extremely active and committed clans. VOIDING seems likely to me to support them in wanting to get on with the next challenge, while removing the unnatural rating hit (which makes it harder for clan leaders to determine players true capabilities). What other positive /negative/ unintended consequences could it have ?
@stevehewitt saidThanks for your reply Steve.
@venda
I think your “Voiding” suggestion has some merit. Someone commented that it would just introduce a new opportunity for ‘gaming the system’ in a different way. We should explore how it could be abused, in case it has unintended consequences, but I have to say it seems to do the trick. I understand that the declared logic for allowing the tactical resignations is t ...[text shortened]... players true capabilities). What other positive /negative/ unintended consequences could it have ?
Thinking about it again,I don't think it would work that well actually.
A challenge would still be won or lost regardless of the resignation,otherwise the clan leader would not be demanding it.
The only way it could deter the tactic would be if a challenge with a voided game in it was NOT wiped from the clan total of current games in progress thus restricting the clan from mounting a new challenge under the "number"restriction already in place.
The only way then, that a challenge could be removed from the total was if games were played to their conclusion.
Also a file for voided games would show just how prevalent this tactic has become.
This system could be abused by players not accepting a resignation,even when merited,to do just that-restrict a clan from mounting new challenges.
Overall therefore,it's probably not a good idea.
Thanks to everyone for their input.
- Joined
- 10 Jan 22
- Moves
- 55635
Let's look at the real world of club OTB ...
In any club v club match, should there be any games still playing although the result is decided, a player on the winning team is unlikely to just resign. In reality, a draw is most likely to be agreed unless there is a clearly won game. This is my real experience. If a player decides to resign, the opponent does not have the option to deny that resignation 🙄
Equally, most players I've come across do their utmost to protect their rating from falling .... yes there are some that want to get into lower rating banded tournaments, but most want to achieve as higher rating as they can ...
Now in the parallel universe that is RHP Clans there are a couple of reasons why a player will resign games that are either drawn or won positions. The first is to lower their rating. All clans have these players. Every challenge I issue I see players from ALL clans that have a huge difference between TER and current ... some have 300 points difference. This lower rating means easier challenges for them and their clan.
The 2nd is largely the domain of the top clans trying to be the anunual clan winner. The incentive here (and I know for 100% for sure that Vespin encourages this), is that in order to keep the volume of challenges going that are needed to be at the top (it is a volume, not quality, based competition afterall) the clan leaders need to get nugatory games completed so they can raise another challenge. Therefore the players are actively encouraged to resign games to get the challenge complete and the points in the bag. This is a fact.
For IVV there are lots of clans that we have 3 in progress challenges, with at least 1 of those challenges already decided but one or two games in progress that the opponents won't accept draws or resign clearly lost games. So what do I do? I need to raise more challenges, but am constrained by the 3 challenge limit and players dragging out games for no purpose ...
The Clan system being a volume-based system fosters this behaviour. Fact.
As for individuals resigning games to reduce their rating .... well that practice has been rife for as long as I can remember, back to the mid 2000s when Metallica were first called out on it. Now EVERY clan has players who sandbag deliberately. Name a clan with 6 or more players and I'll point out at least one sandbagger 🙂
So, Venda, whilst I get what you are suggesting, it is in fact a practice that is largely the domain of a handful of clans that you are trying to find a solution to ....
But your suggestion won't work in practicality.
In reality there needs to be wholesale changes to the clan system and its associated ratings.
The sad reality is that there remains only a handful of clans capable of winning, with 2024 2 weeks in already down to a shortlist of 3. In the meantime the number of clans is now down to 4 pages (it used to be 20+)
Time for a new system to be implemented in time for 2025, Russ, in my humble opinion.
@anglian saidClan matches are team games.
Let's look at the real world of club OTB ...
In any club v club match, should there be any games still playing although the result is decided, a player on the winning team is unlikely to just resign. In reality, a draw is most likely to be agreed unless there is a clearly won game. This is my real experience. If a player decides to resign, the opponent does not have the op ...[text shortened]... to be 20+)
Time for a new system to be implemented in time for 2025, Russ, in my humble opinion.
You never sacrificed a piece to gain a tactical advantage.
Stop whining ffs.
@anglian saidI agree Alex.
Let's look at the real world of club OTB ...
In any club v club match, should there be any games still playing although the result is decided, a player on the winning team is unlikely to just resign. In reality, a draw is most likely to be agreed unless there is a clearly won game. This is my real experience. If a player decides to resign, the opponent does not have the op ...[text shortened]... to be 20+)
Time for a new system to be implemented in time for 2025, Russ, in my humble opinion.
Having re considered my suggestion I realise the impracticality's and yes I was just trying to think of a way to limit the tactical resignations practice
I don't necessarily accept that every clan has sandbaggers though.When I ran the Laikers I saw no evidence of this.
I don't know how to mend the clan system.All sorts of things have been tried in the past with little success.
Unless the net points list is scrapped ,and replaced with a table based on averages I feel nothing will change.
@venda saidI don't see how you can agree with Alex (Anglian)
I agree Alex.
Having re considered my suggestion I realise the impracticality's and yes I was just trying to think of a way to limit the tactical resignations practice
I don't necessarily accept that every clan has sandbaggers though.When I ran the Laikers I saw no evidence of this.
I don't know how to mend the clan system.All sorts of things have been tried in the past with ...[text shortened]... net points list is scrapped ,and replaced with a table based on averages I feel nothing will change.
He has an agenda to get other clans to stop playing Metallica and Breaking Bad, showing how much he wants to be in 1rst place.
He isn't concerned about the system just finishing first going so far as saying just don't Play Metallica Or Breaking Bad, I say shame on him and those who support him.
-VR
@Very-Rusty
So, Venda, whilst I get what you are suggesting, it is in fact a practice that is largely the domain of a handful of clans that you are trying to find a solution to ....
But your suggestion won't work in practicality.In reality there needs to be wholesale changes to the clan system and its associated ratings.
This is the bit I agree with Bill,his reply to my idea
Much of this commentary appears a bit clannish ... jaja ... from my profile :
"... & an upd8te... to those under ~ 1.3-1.5 K ... to suddenly (w/o notice) , just quit [resign] ... is to disrespect the game, yourself & more importantly your partner ... play it out ... you'll be amazed how often @ our level ... lady luck &/or blunder plays her hand ... njoy the ryde & get over the fact you just myte lose anudda game : } we all need endgame practice" ...