02 Jan 17
Originally posted by moonbusHow would this deal with what went on last year ?
Yes. If your clan challenges clans with similar ratings and wins, your own clan's standing goes up. If your clan challenges clans with lower ratings and wins, your own clan's standing goes up only slightly. If your clan challenges clans with higher ratings and wins or draws, your own clan's rating goes up significantly. Thus, improvement is rewarded, ...[text shortened]... auty of it is that it works equally for all rating bands, and all clan sizes, and all time outs.
Clans could still collude with each other
I have yet to see a proposal that will deal with the way things have gone on for quite some time now
Last year saw it go to it's nth degree
Also the problem of sandbagging is still not being addressed
Even when players admit on their home page that they do it
It is something that has been complained about since I first joined almost 10 years ago
Some of the proposals are that each clan play equal amount of players
Some that some form of a league should be played
Both of these are daft
I know that in my own clan some players want a lot of games some just a few
There must be some way of averaging things out
The points awarded for each challenge at the moment is stupid
I do not know of any game be it FOOTBALL NFL CRICKET RUGBY DARTS NETBALL even CRIBBAGE where when you lose your total points that you have already won are reduced
Originally posted by moonbussorry to keep repeating, but a policy is already in place to stop collusion clans have been suspended and points removed in the past it happened on a much lesser scale than what happened in 2016
First correct the flaws in the system and the corrupted standings (collusion points should be annulled, I agree). Then set up a policy for dealing with miscreants. Ad hoc punishments only make people more devious in trying to avoid detection.
so why is nothing happening now?
RUSS has given us a great chance to sort out the clan system but how many clan leaders have bothered to take part, i know a few who are disgusted a few got away with ruining the system, they will not play or re-new subs unless justice is done.
the only way the clan system can go ahead punishments must be handed out, collusion points must be removed, its meant to be a honour system, but if some on here have no honour then remove their points send a message to those who ruin
Originally posted by roma45Sorry to keep repeating this, but collusion is a symptom, not the cause of trouble here. The reason why certain people are colluding is that they object to perceived injustices in the way clan standings are calculated and collusion is their underhanded way of dealing with it. Fix the underlying cause and give it a chance to work. If the symptom still doesn't disappear, then ensure that a policy (whatever it is) is implemented consistently and swiftly.
sorry to keep repeating, but a policy is already in place to stop collusion clans have been suspended and points removed in the past it happened on a much lesser scale than what happened in 2016
so why is nothing happening now?
RUSS has given us a great chance to sort out the clan system but how many clan leaders have bothered to take part, i know a few ...[text shortened]... em, but if some on here have no honour then remove their points send a message to those who ruin
I for one don't see that there is any policing policy in force here. Some posters have claimed that certain people were suspended in 2015, others deny this. I don't know because I joined a clan too late to see any alleged suspensions. Fact is that in 2016 nothing happened either swiftly enough or consistently enough to have any even vaguely deterrent effect.
If there really is a policy, let it be posted for all to see in plain text, including who enforces it and what the trigger thresholds are.
A policy should include protocols for submitting and responding to allegations of suspicious activity, gathering and verifying facts regarding allegations of suspicious activity, warnings to clan captains involved in suspicious activity, warnings to players involved in suspicious activity, and, in cases of repeated non-compliance, a sliding scale of graded remedial measures including (but maybe not limited to) rolling back points, annulling challenges, temporary suspension, permanent banning (exile), or whatever. I haven't seen any such policy yet; as far as I can tell, there were just a few ad hoc punitive measures meted out sporadically. That quite obviously has had no deterrent effect.
Originally posted by moonbusyou can call collusion a symptom i prefer to call it cheating.
Sorry to keep repeating this, but collusion is a symptom, not the cause of trouble here. The reason why certain people are colluding is that they object to perceived injustices in the way clan standings are calculated and collusion is their underhanded way of dealing with it. Fix the underlying cause and give it a chance to work. If the symptom ...[text shortened]... hoc punitive measures meted out sporadically. That quite obviously has had no deterrent effect.
you can call it a protest i call it cheating
the protest seems to be players leaving or not renewing subs you included i note.
for the clan challenge to move forward collusion must be punished
first offence remove points tell all players involved why, some dont read just play, if i was matched 20 times against a player who does not move and lets me win by timeout i would ask clan leader why? obviously some are happy with that.
second offence points removed and a 30 day suspension on clan games.
two clans got suspended in 2015, basically the same players involved did it again,
i cant move forward until justice has been done,many more will protest by leaing sad that a few hae ruined the site
NOTE i have not used any players name so they cany run crying, we all know who they are though, did you know one of them runs a rival site? i wonder how many he has poached from here? again i will not name him
- Joined
- 17 Mar 10
- Moves
- 645292
moonbus I have not read all you wrote in great detail as some of it goes over my head im afraid. 🙂
Sounds great I suppose 🙂
Just a mini comment though...
Which Clan would be the Clan of the year:
Clan A that plays 400 challenges a year and only wins say 250 and loses 150
or Clan B that plays 6 challenges a year and wins all 6.
I think that touches on the so called level playing field your formulas talk about.
You need to remember though or be aware of: Over the new year, alot of games were lost to skull as well as many games over a year are lost to skull.
One has no control over that. We also have guys join your clan, win a few games, then after you include him in a bunch of challenges he just decides to mass resign for whatever reason.... (sinister or just life)
That is why I like the points system changing.
Imagine you are leading a challenge 11-10 with 2 games to go and that guy mass resigns on you.
Losing 12-11 is a bitter amount of points to swallow.... where as some points received because "life happens" will be welcome.
Why not let the most active clan of the year be the clan of the year?
There are many many one sided challenges on the go and in the past. Some are just better at hiding it. or excusing it 🙂
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 326101
Originally posted by CostadJust to say, we do actually have controls over skulls. I put in vacation dates for the extended Christmas period.
moonbus I have not read all you wrote in great detail as some of it goes over my head im afraid. 🙂
Sounds great I suppose 🙂
Just a mini comment though...
Which Clan would be the Clan of the year:
Clan A that plays 400 challenges a year and only wins say 250 and loses 150
or Clan B that plays 6 challenges a year and wins all 6.
I think that touches on ...[text shortened]... sided challenges on the go and in the past. Some are just better at hiding it. or excusing it 🙂
Problem solved!
Originally posted by Startreaderi played in costads clan for years great leader BTW
Just to say, we do actually have controls over skulls. I put in vacation dates for the extended Christmas period.
Problem solved!
he had the problem of players joining then leaing the site after haing lots of clan games to play, i think thats what he meant
02 Jan 17
Originally posted by CostadHi Costad. Thanks for weighing in. One of the great attractions of the clan system, over a team system, is its flexibility. I have played on teams (I mean real teams! ). They are organized very rigidly: every team has the same number of players, members stay the course, boards are matched within strict rating bounds (1st boards play only 1st or 2d boards, etc.), teams play all the same number of matches and the schedule of matches is fixed in advance, there are standard time limits, and there are compulsory adjudication protocols. Within that rigid system, bulk wins is a sensible and enforceable ranking system, with tie-breaks being finally decisive.
moonbus I have not read all you wrote in great detail as some of it goes over my head im afraid. 🙂
Sounds great I suppose 🙂
Just a mini comment though...
Which Clan would be the Clan of the year:
Clan A that plays 400 challenges a year and only wins say 250 and loses 150
or Clan B that plays 6 challenges a year and wins all 6.
I think that touches on ...[text shortened]... sided challenges on the go and in the past. Some are just better at hiding it. or excusing it 🙂
The clan system is nothing like that, and no one here wants to see it mutate into anything like that. Clans can be of any size, they can be composed of strong or weak players in any combination, time limits are variable, challenges are entirely contractual between captains, there is no compulsory adjudication protocol. It is a virtual chess cafe, IMO. Nice, nice, very nice, but there is no simple way to determine which clan is the best within such a vague and constantly fluctuating 'system'. Bulk wins is clearly not the appropriate metric in this context. Maybe the whole idea of a best clan has no meaning here. Maybe we should be looking at several different categories of metrics: the most prolific clan, the most improved clan, the most tenacious defending-a-seemingly-hopeless-position clan, the most aggressive attacking clan (even if they lost a lot), the most elegant sacrificial-combinations clan, and so on, but no best clan. Maybe, I just don't know.
Originally posted by roma45Cheating? By what definition? According to the terms of service at RHP there is no mention of collusion and no definition what constitutes collusion. Neither is there any rule which says it is forbidden. Neither is there any definition of a dead player or any rule forbidding 'recruitment' of dead players to clans. So these practices are not cheating in any but a colloquial sense that they breach an unwritten code of sportsmanship. The events of 2016 have demonstrated that an unwritten code of sportsmanship is inadequate here. The honor system broke. That is one of the flaws in the system which urgently needs to be redressed. We need more exact and more comprehensive definitions of what constitutes good sportsmanship and what constitutes a breach of sportsmanship.
you can call collusion a symptom i prefer to call it cheating.
you can call it a protest i call it cheating
the protest seems to be players leaving or not renewing subs you included i note.
for the clan challenge to move forward collusion must be punished
first offence remove points tell all players involved why, some dont read just play, if i was mat ...[text shortened]... of them runs a rival site? i wonder how many he has poached from here? again i will not name him
Originally posted by moonbuschess is a game of skill and honour, collusion shows no honour.
Cheating? By what definition? According to the terms of service at RHP there is no mention of collusion and no definition what constitutes collusion. Neither is there any rule which says it is forbidden. Neither is there any definition of a dead player or any rule forbidding 'recruitment' of dead players to clans. So these practices are not cheating in any b ...[text shortened]... finitions of what constitutes good sportsmanship and what constitutes a breach of sportsmanship.
explain if its okay then why did two clans get suspended last year? they still are suspended if no rule was broken? why have clans had points removed in the past if no rule were broken?
selecting "dead players" over and over against the same clan, that is beyond bad sportsmanship.
my proposals
1] separate clan and tournament rating
2] no "dead players" allowed to be selected not moved in 14 days cant be selected
3] no one man clans
4] points say 5 v5 winning clan gets 10 points plus one point per game won, losing clan gets zero points but one point per game won zero points awarded for a draw.
5] if a game is won by timeout without a player movng no points awarded
6] collusion points removed from last year, put integrity back to RHP plus stop players leaving
7] the clan that has the most points win champions should be those who do the work
8] all challenges end on 31st dec, not carried on to the new year
9] every clan leader can get 3 fair play tickets they can complaint another clan is in collusion, if its proved wrong the complaining clan lose 50 points.
10] lets just get back to playing fair chess no matter what our rating is.
Originally posted by padgerpadger,
While I agree with nearly all of this it does nothing to counteract sandbagging
I would add Clans can only challenge the same clans twice a year
Now you are putting a restriction on the amount of games played. Which has already been done by the new rules put in affect, which didn't really stop the collusion, just slowed it down a little.
I use to get 40 games at a time. Now I am lucky if I am able to get to 10 games, which is a drastic cut back in games when you are use to playing 40 games. This would even cut the games back more!!! Do we really want to do this?
I LOVE to play CHESS!!! I have way too much time on my hands now to banter in the forums, which is just a waste of time in my opinion!!!
-VR
Originally posted by Very Rustythere seems to be a shortage of clans and clan players just now can't think why?
padger,
Now you are putting a restriction on the amount of games played. Which has already been done by the new rules put in affect, which didn't really stop the collusion, just slowed it down a little.
I use to get 40 games at a time. Now I am lucky if I am able to get to 10 games, which is a drastic cut back in games when you are use to playing 40 games. This would even cut the games back more!!! Do we really want to do this?
-VR
oh i just remembered a lot will not play until the collusion has been punished
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 326101
Originally posted by roma45I'm in Costad's site know.
i played in costads clan for years great leader BTW
he had the problem of players joining then leaing the site after haing lots of clan games to play, i think thats what he meant
Totally agree, he's a great leader, and he knows I think so! 🙂