1. Standard memberKingDavid403
    King David
    Planet Earth.
    Joined
    19 May '05
    Moves
    166594
    25 May '10 15:29
    Originally posted by my2sons
    I took 50 clan members at random and compared their current ratings to their 5 year high ratings.

    5 year high - 1687
    current rating - 1518

    If we set the warning flag at a 350 point differential between a players 5 year high versus current rating, 3 of the 50 players would be flagged. The stats on the 3 players in question:

    player A - current 1 ...[text shortened]... uld expand the sample size, but I suspect the results would not change significantly.

    my2sons
    Very good work. 350 is looking perfect to I as all three should be flagged as your results show. Great job! πŸ˜€
  2. Standard memberdrdon
    His Mateship
    Glowing in the dark
    Joined
    30 Apr '05
    Moves
    118683
    25 May '10 17:37
    Originally posted by KingDavid403
    Very good work. 350 is looking perfect to I as all three should be flagged as your results show. Great job! πŸ˜€
    'Flagging" at any set point will only create serious anomalies eg a 350 point difference will earn a red flag but 349 won't? Trying to replace common sense with numbers grabbed out of the air won't improve matters. Clan leaders should look at each pairing in each challenge and not hide behind an arbitrary level pretending it is an objective standard. Serious, deliberate sandbaggers will be given the same silly target to hide behind.

    This is no better than what we currently have and is probably a great deal worse.
  3. Subscribermy2sons
    Retired
    Missouri
    Joined
    02 Aug '07
    Moves
    83293
    25 May '10 18:36
    Originally posted by drdon
    'Flagging" at any set point will only create serious anomalies eg a 350 point difference will earn a red flag but 349 won't? Trying to replace common sense with numbers grabbed out of the air won't improve matters. Clan leaders should look at each pairing in each challenge and not hide behind an arbitrary level pretending it is an objective standard. Serious, ...[text shortened]... behind.

    This is no better than what we currently have and is probably a great deal worse.
    Well you have to put the line somewhere.

    I say put it to a vote of all clan leaders and majority rules.

    Democracy in action. Shall we take the proposed vote to Russ?
  4. THORNINYOURSIDE
    Joined
    04 Sep '04
    Moves
    245624
    25 May '10 19:43
    Originally posted by drdon
    'Flagging" at any set point will only create serious anomalies eg a 350 point difference will earn a red flag but 349 won't? Trying to replace common sense with numbers grabbed out of the air won't improve matters. Clan leaders should look at each pairing in each challenge and not hide behind an arbitrary level pretending it is an objective standard. Serious, ...[text shortened]... behind.

    This is no better than what we currently have and is probably a great deal worse.
    I have to disagree, flagging of obvious differences between true and current rating can only help in challenges.

    An automated system whereby a 1800 player who is currently rated at 1400 is "flagged" because they are X points (I'd make the difference less than 350) lower than their best should make accepting challenges easier.

    It saves a bit of time
  5. Standard memberdrdon
    His Mateship
    Glowing in the dark
    Joined
    30 Apr '05
    Moves
    118683
    25 May '10 20:29
    Originally posted by adramforall
    I have to disagree, flagging of obvious differences between true and current rating can only help in challenges.

    An automated system whereby a 1800 player who is currently rated at 1400 is "flagged" because they are X points (I'd make the difference less than 350) lower than their best should make accepting challenges easier.

    It saves a bit of time
    If the difference is "obvious", ergo obvious to clan leaders, why does it need a flag? A flag may come to mean 'DO NOT ACCEPT THIS CHALLENGE without further consideration. We do not need this complication.
  6. Subscribermy2sons
    Retired
    Missouri
    Joined
    02 Aug '07
    Moves
    83293
    25 May '10 23:11
    Originally posted by drdon
    If the difference is "obvious", ergo obvious to clan leaders, why does it need a flag? A flag may come to mean 'DO NOT ACCEPT THIS CHALLENGE without further consideration. We do not need this complication.
    Well, if it comes about the flag means DO NOT ACCEPT THIS CHALLENGE, that would be a good thing. Perhaps then the practice of sandbagging would go away since the disadvantage of sandbagging might finally outway the benefit.

    Also, how is the flag a complication? The challenge can still be accepted. The only complication is that the sandbaggers are exposed.
  7. Subscribercoquette
    Already mated
    Omaha, Nebraska, USA
    Joined
    04 Jul '06
    Moves
    1113834
    26 May '10 04:50
    Originally posted by my2sons
    I agree, let's vote on whether to improve the current system or leave the way it is.

    If there is a strong response on improving the current clan challenge system then we can work on the detailing the improvements. I really don't want to spend a lot of time working a series of system improvements and then find out it is no big deal for most of the clans members.

    How about that, coquette and I actually agree on somethingπŸ™‚πŸ™‚πŸ™‚

    my2sons
    OMG the fabric of the universe may have torn!
  8. THORNINYOURSIDE
    Joined
    04 Sep '04
    Moves
    245624
    26 May '10 06:51
    Originally posted by drdon
    If the difference is "obvious", ergo obvious to clan leaders, why does it need a flag? A flag may come to mean 'DO NOT ACCEPT THIS CHALLENGE without further consideration. We do not need this complication.
    I don't see it as a complication. All the flag is doing would be highlighting someone playing well below their ability. The challenge can still be accepted as normal.
  9. Standard memberdrdon
    His Mateship
    Glowing in the dark
    Joined
    30 Apr '05
    Moves
    118683
    26 May '10 12:17
    Originally posted by adramforall
    I don't see it as a complication. All the flag is doing would be highlighting someone playing well below their ability. The challenge can still be accepted as normal.
    Sure the challenge can be accepted. That is the case now. Therefore there is absolutely no need for the red. or any other coloured flag. If the difference between players is as obvious as you indicate. the issue is is a dead duck.

    We do not need a vote on this issue. The acceptance or challenges is up to clan leaders now. Why do we need a flag? To rescue leaders from stupidity? People shouldn't be clan leaders if they are so dim as to need a flag to tell them that a player is playing 350 below their normal rating!
  10. Standard memberKingDavid403
    King David
    Planet Earth.
    Joined
    19 May '05
    Moves
    166594
    26 May '10 13:452 edits
    I think we should take it to Russ for a vote as my2sons suggested. We know we have one no vote but everyone else that's chimed in seems to think it's not a bad idea.

    Does anyone else have anymore comments or suggestions to make this site idea any better than is proposed now?? Or just any more comments for or against this idea?? The more minds the better. I know there's pros and cons to almost any idea and maybe someone sees something I do not. And we don't want to create a monster here for this site.
    So far all I can see this idea doing is improving this site and dramatically dealing with the sandbagging problem for clans that has been going on for years now and has only gotten worse over time.
  11. Joined
    05 Jan '04
    Moves
    45179
    26 May '10 16:39
    What's with all this "Let's take this to Russ!" talk. Isn't that what you're doing by posting it here?
  12. Standard membersbacat
    Eddie's Dad
    Raving Mad
    Joined
    13 Jun '08
    Moves
    268608
    26 May '10 16:47
    Originally posted by darvlay
    What's with all this "Let's take this to Russ!" talk. Isn't that what you're doing by posting it here?
    That was my original intent. The vote that's being called for now is quite a bit different from the OP, but my thinking is that if a less-comprehensive-but-still-helpful change gains support, then it's a step in the right direction.

    I have no idea how often these suggestions are reviewed, but ideally we'll get feedback soon to acknowledge the concept and agree to put it up for a vote.
  13. Joined
    05 Jan '04
    Moves
    45179
    26 May '10 16:50
    Originally posted by sbacat
    I have no idea how often these suggestions are reviewed, but ideally we'll get feedback soon to acknowledge the concept and agree to put it up for a vote.
    Ideally, yes.

    But don't hold your breath.

    Just sayin'.
  14. Standard membersbacat
    Eddie's Dad
    Raving Mad
    Joined
    13 Jun '08
    Moves
    268608
    26 May '10 17:02
    Originally posted by darvlay
    Just sayin'.
    The only thing I know for sure, in here and anywhere else: you don't ask, you never get. πŸ˜‰
  15. Standard memberKingDavid403
    King David
    Planet Earth.
    Joined
    19 May '05
    Moves
    166594
    26 May '10 17:23
    Originally posted by darvlay
    What's with all this "Let's take this to Russ!" talk. Isn't that what you're doing by posting it here?
    Isn't that what you're doing by posting it here?
    Good question. I don't know how often he scans the forums. But if we send feedback with thread link we know Russ or Chris will get it then, I think .πŸ™„
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree