Originally posted by Swiss ToniYes, I think the referee is a good idea. But it poses some questions: who will be the referee (perhaps the player with most completed games?)? how will that be decided? what if the referee is eliminated? how much power does he have? - my suggestion would be to let him start the next round only and have the responsibility of alerting the game mods if anything is out of order (note: this implies changing the TOS in order to refer to this kind of problems - sportsmanship), after the round is complete and the referee isn't able to start the next round, then the next round should be continued automatically after 3(?) days.
OK, so we need to come up with a solution to this problem. Does anyone have anything to add to my earlier suggestion of a trial tournament with a Referee?
If we can come up with something collectively here that could solve this problem in a duel we can then put it in Site Ideas & see if it gains any traction.
Nothing will get done or get better if we just moan about it. We have to come up with a solution.
I'm not sure this will work as perfectly as intended, but if organized correctly then it might work.
For the Referee, this is what I had in mind:
1/. The Referee would be chosen at random from the "Referee Pool" - a group of 6 top players on the site, who are then ineligible for the tournament.
2/. The Referee's job would simply be to progress the tournament from round to round as opposed to the current auto-progression.
3/. Referee looks at all pairings where there was a tie and make a judgement call on if the result is "fair." If the Referee is happy that the tied pairings were played in a sporting way, no action is taken and they progress the tournament to the next round as usual. If they deem that the tied result was manufactured, they can impose a "play-off game" for the pairing.
4/. If the play-off game is also played in an unsporting manner, neither player in the pair progresses and the next round continues without them.
5/. The Referee is notified by system message to their account that the tournament they are Referee of has all games finished - it's then that they have a look at the tied pairs & decide if the results are sporting.
6/. The Referee has a back-up, designated at random from the "Referee Pool." This will prevent a Ref on holiday delaying things.
7/. For transparency, the pool of 6 Referees would be known/published & the designated Referee for the tournament would be system-chosen before the tournament starts accepting entrants. The Refs name would appear under the Tournament name.
I'd put this forward as a trial in maybe a couple of open Random Duel Tournaments. Being realistic, there are not many times where the Referee would have to do anything except click the button to start the next round. Early draws agreed in a duel are thankfully pretty rare, but having the Ref there would ensure there is no funny business.
Originally posted by Swiss ToniYes I agree with most ideas, it seems best that the referee doesn't participate. I'm not sure the referee has to be one of the top players of the site though, I for one wouldn't mind being referee and am certainly no top player. I think the referees should comply to these factors: 1.Be a subscriber 2.Having played more than X moves/games
For the Referee, this is what I had in mind:
1/. The Referee would be chosen at random from the "Referee Pool" - a group of 6 top players on the site, who are then ineligible for the tournament.
2/. The Referee's job would simply be to progress the tournament from round to round as opposed to the current auto-progression.
3/. Referee looks at all pai ...[text shortened]... kfully pretty rare, but having the Ref there would ensure there is no funny business.
Also I don't think there should be a play-off game, this would only hold up the tournament. If the players are twisting the rules they have no right to stay in the tournament in my opinion.
Originally posted by orion25Good points.
Yes I agree with most ideas, it seems best that the referee doesn't participate. I'm not sure the referee has to be one of the top players of the site though, I for one wouldn't mind being referee and am certainly no top player. I think the referees should comply to these factors: 1.Be a subscriber 2.Having played more than X moves/games
Also I don't thin ...[text shortened]... e players are twisting the rules they have no right to stay in the tournament in my opinion.
- Joined
- 12 Nov 06
- Moves
- 74414
I don't like the referee idea. Seems like it would just be an inconvenience for the two players who wish to draw. Instead of drawing after 6 moves they would just play out the most boring drawish game you could imagine. Then what is the referee going to do? Kick out anyone who plays a boring game? 🙄
Originally posted by paulbuchmanfromficsI only said that 'cause it was followed (edit - well, actually preceded) by 'top players' as if they deserve special treatment or that we should take that into account when discussing this topic.. yes, I have also drawn and been close head-to-head in one or two tournaments, where (post middle game) drawing was a lifeline.. can share your sentiment, but that's not the point
In the other post, you also said the word "tremendous" (pressure) was bad usage of the word. You don't actually know the worry that went through my mind when I had a draw and the other guy didn't. You didn't actually experience it for yourself.
Rather than hang on every word I say, try looking at this unbiased
huh ?? you're giving me a lesson in being biased ? interesting... how did me being biased manifest?
Please stop trying to reinterpret my posts !!!
we're so sensitive, aren't we.. {do I get a forum ban for this??}
Someone also said that any player could play the role of a refree, not just higher rated players. This is also wrong, because there are a number of positions where it seems that one player is easily winning, and only after a lot of analysis does it become clear that he has no way to force a win.
Originally posted by Phlabibitagreed.. wanted to comment on this, but you beat me to it..
It can't be proven one way or the other if it was decided before the game, but the draw position in the 2 games shown doesn't look any more like a draw position than the start position of any chess game.
