1. Joined
    31 Jan '07
    Moves
    93899
    03 Apr '08 12:46
    Since ratings can go up and down suddenly for good and legitimate reasons, such as ill-health for example, "sandbagging" is a charge frequently made and often unjustified.

    The Tournament Entry Rating is an average of Present Rating and Highest Rating in last 100 days. Here's my proposal to reduce sandbagging in tournament and clan games:

    # Set TER at: 100 or 200 points below Highest Ever Rating.
    # Prevent access to banded tournaments until player has finished 40 games.
    # Add to the Public Games listing the number of moves reached in that game.

    This is a package deal, as I think it covers just about everything needed to make this work.

    If I've forgotten anything, please copy and add to this list. Here's hoping we can finally get something done about a perennial problem.
  2. Subscribercoquette
    Already mated
    Omaha, Nebraska, USA
    Joined
    04 Jul '06
    Moves
    887649
    03 Apr '08 19:26
    Originally posted by MissOleum
    Since ratings can go up and down suddenly for good and legitimate reasons, such as ill-health for example, "sandbagging" is a charge frequently made and often unjustified.

    The Tournament Entry Rating is an average of Present Rating and Highest Rating in last 100 days. Here's my proposal to reduce sandbagging in tournament and clan games:

    # Set TER a ...[text shortened]... d to this list. Here's hoping we can finally get something done about a perennial problem.
    for the first time ever, i actually agree with MissOleum, although I don't quite get the third suggestion. i'm sure it's valid though.
  3. Standard membernmdavidb
    I Drank What? ©
    Account suspended
    Joined
    07 Nov '07
    Moves
    2320
    03 Apr '08 20:24
    Originally posted by coquette
    for the first time ever, i actually agree with MissOleum, although I don't quite get the third suggestion. i'm sure it's valid though.
    Fischer used to say back in the day about "GM draws" which usually ocurred in like 15 moves...so it seemed that some woud help each other in the tourney.

    I think you can tell when "sandbagging" or the draw thing is usually happening...but at some times it is hard to spot.

    95% on this site play straight up...or so i think...the other have found ways to beat the system. How would any 1300 player feel if i dumped a buncha games to whup up on them??? Not very good. Plus I would just kick myself in the butt for being that stupid...but maybe a 1500 might feel it to be worthwhile.

    Seems having a tourney win means alot.

    I agree with Miss O's suggestion.

    Dave
  4. Joined
    31 Jan '07
    Moves
    93899
    03 Apr '08 21:20
    Also see Thread 86974 where others have come up with good suggestions.

    I suggested an easy-to-see "move number in game" because it makes it much easier to spot a number of activities not beneficial to the site, such as a two-account rating tamper exercise, or pranksters like the fools-mate twins. A player's "finished games"list showing many 4s and 5s provides a quick warning to potential opponents.
  5. Subscribercoquette
    Already mated
    Omaha, Nebraska, USA
    Joined
    04 Jul '06
    Moves
    887649
    04 Apr '08 04:32
    Originally posted by MissOleum
    Also see Thread 86974 where others have come up with good suggestions.

    I suggested an easy-to-see "move number in game" because it makes it much easier to spot a number of activities not beneficial to the site, such as a two-account rating tamper exercise, or pranksters like the fools-mate twins. A player's "finished games"list showing many 4s and 5s provides a quick warning to potential opponents.
    ah thanks. cool. then i agree on all the counts. something must be wrong with me. need to go and take temperature and pulse.
  6. SubscriberPonderableonline
    chemist
    Linkenheim
    Joined
    22 Apr '05
    Moves
    516035
    04 Apr '08 06:55
    I support the ideas of Miss Oleum.

    as for possible problems:

    # There are enough unrated tournament for new players, that barring them from banded ones until they reached at least some kind of stable rating wouldn't affect their rights too deeply.

    # rating spikes: yes most of us had these, due to various reasons (even a silly attempt by one player to go to 2000). A common rating plateau would thus affect all players roughly equally.

    *** The whole exercise would be beneficial to the feelings of a lot of paying members. Thus it would be worthwhile even if all sandbaggers would leave.
  7. UK
    Joined
    16 Dec '02
    Moves
    70740
    04 Apr '08 18:19
    I think that the current tourny entry rating system works pretty well and is reasonably fair.

    You have to be careful generating rules based on what appears to be the scheming behaviour of a minority (in this case those you call sandbaggers) as it can unfairly penalise people who are using the site normally.

    My highest ever spike (non-provisional) was 1600. I do not play at a 1600 level. I don't have the time to analyse my games that deeply all the time, and frankly it's too much effort. But I've been there. I would find it very unfair if, because of a few people being "sandbaggers", suddenly my tourny rating is based on a 1600 all time high, and I can only enter 1500-1600 bands. That seriously limits my enjoyment of tournaments, because I like playing the banded tournies against similarly rated folk. They are normally tight matches. There's no fun being pasted by people ranked hundreds of points above me. That limits my fun on the site, which to me is a worse thing than sandbagging itself, which I think is the exception rather than the rule.
  8. Joined
    31 Jan '07
    Moves
    93899
    07 Apr '08 04:47
    If you are capable of playing at 1600, but play at a lower level, you are still an unfair competitor in a 1300 tournament. People normally put more thought into their tournament games and try to play at their best. A 200-point discount would allow you to enter bands from 1400 up in any case. Banded under-1400 tournaments are for people whose best game is a good deal lower than 1600.
  9. UK
    Joined
    16 Dec '02
    Moves
    70740
    08 Apr '08 20:41
    Originally posted by MissOleum
    If you are capable of playing at 1600, but play at a lower level, you are still an unfair competitor in a 1300 tournament. People normally put more thought into their tournament games and try to play at their best. A 200-point discount would allow you to enter bands from 1400 up in any case. Banded under-1400 tournaments are for people whose best game is a good deal lower than 1600.
    I fear you miss the point.
  10. SubscriberVery Rusty
    Treat Everyone Equal
    Halifax, Nova Scotia
    Joined
    04 Oct '06
    Moves
    414141
    14 Apr '08 03:57
    Originally posted by mrmist
    I think that the current tourny entry rating system works pretty well and is reasonably fair.

    You have to be careful generating rules based on what appears to be the scheming behaviour of a minority (in this case those you call sandbaggers) as it can unfairly penalise people who are using the site normally.

    My highest ever spike (non-provisional) wa ...[text shortened]... worse thing than sandbagging itself, which I think is the exception rather than the rule.
    You know I use to feel like you do. I have come to the conclusion not to be concerned about the sandbaggers, or where the rating is, just enjoy the games. Get yourself in a good club, some of them are talking about having sections, like in real clubs, so you can play people within your own range of play.
Back to Top