Vote for adjustments to the clan scoring system

Originally posted by my2sons
By you own words, then, you make the strongest case yet that some sort of indicator is needed to identify players whose current ratings are significantly below
their true chess ability.

my2sons

No.. that's bending my words..

However, the most easy to spot indicator is already there, only 1 click away: player graphs!
But a lot of the complaining clan leaders seem to find that too much effort?

A flag (or smiley, or whatever indicator you like) is only a translation from somebody's graph.. and only looks at quantitative rules..

I believe we do agree that something has to be implemented Mike, but I don't think that the way to go is to add flags, alarm bells and more visuals besides the graphs which are already there..

I know I've only been able to come up with the TER idea, but it does limit the amount of loop holes and I haven't seen so many more brighter ideas...

Originally posted by Amsterdamn
[b]And YOUR TER suggestion of implemention of having to match within 100 points of TER would be ideal for you, player lowers rating 500 points from 1800 to 1300 for 12 months..
I don't see how that can be done so easily..

And wins most..
Look at Spinning Stars.. they lose most.. and are 3rd, just by playing more games than you.. so e helping those clan leaders who seem not be willing to look more closely at the challenges..[/b]

I don't see how that can be done so easily.. As a clan leader I think you see. If not take a look around.

Look at,Spinning Stars.. they lose most.. and are 3rd, just by playing more games than you.. so if that's gonna be the way, you will see clans on top who play most games.. and that will not change the top 10.. unless you wanna limit the max amount of games... etc etc etc..
The only way to gain positive points for your clan and end up in the top ten or so is to win or draw more on clan matches than you lose. Plain and simple. The spinning stars may have lost more matches than us, But they also won more matches than us and played way more matches than us. And won or drawed more matches than they lost. Therefore they deserve to be ahead of us. More Quantity and Quality.

Imagine that you would allow a true 1400 player who is now at 1100 to play a true 1100 one, since that is possible without being flagged by a 350 deviation from their highs.. how would that suddenly be more fair I didn't say I would let anybody play anybody. The 1400 rated player just would NOT have a yellow flag by them that's all. Still makes clan leaders do there job as you're saying here. Thank you.


Sandbagging is not the true problem: the problem is that clan leaders don't take the time and effort to look into the challenges.
Most things that are proposed, are helping those clan leaders who seem not be willing to look more closely at the challenges.. Same answer as above.

Originally posted by Amsterdamn
No.. that's bending my words..

However, the most easy to spot indicator is already there, only 1 click away: player graphs!
But a lot of the complaining clan leaders seem to find that too much effort?

A flag (or smiley, or whatever indicator you like) is only a translation from somebody's graph.. and only looks at quantitative rules..

I believe ...[text shortened]... ut it does limit the amount of loop holes and I haven't seen so many more brighter ideas...

I suppose using the TER rating for clan challenges is better than nothing, but it can also be manupulated by determined sandbaggers.

I still like the warning signal the best, not so much that it alerts lazy clan leaders but it calls out the sandbaggers.

my2sons

Originally posted by my2sons
I suppose using the TER rating for clan challenges is better than nothing, but it can also be manupulated by determined sandbaggers.

I still like the warning signal the best, not so much that it alerts lazy clan leaders but it calls out the sandbaggers.

my2sons

I still like the warning signal the best, not so much that it alerts lazy clan leaders but it calls out the sandbaggers. Now that hit the nail on the head. 🙂 Emphasize calls out sandbaggers. They know their marked, might as well stop.

Originally posted by Amsterdamn
drdon is not blasting every clan leader.. he actually has good points and asks other clan leaders to put in effort and use of their brains, rather than being dependant on coloured flags..

When you need "the work load of any active competing clan leader", I'll just copy drdon's remarks and make them mine too..

Flags, how can you be so hung up on them ...[text shortened]... for an 2200 player is a different story than the same difference for an 1100 player.

drdon is not blasting every clan leader..

Here's what I said;
"Before you start blasting every clan leader that finds positives in this site idea,"

Originally posted by drdon
That's right! Gosh! What could have a very pretty site with a different designer-coloured flag for each 10-20 rating points below a players highest ever rating.... and introduce an volume entilitled " flag colours for numerically challenged clan leaders". However, This is a game site, I prefer the idea of little Robbie the Robot animations that wave their litt ...[text shortened]... s, Robbie could offer to hold the hands of leaders before they show any signs of leadership?

REC'D (Highly recommended)

Azure for 6 points below
Teal for 8 points below
Magenta for 10 points below
Taupe for 12 points below
Eggshell glistening avocado green hazel for 14 points below

etc!!!

Originally posted by coquette
REC'D (Highly recommended)

Azure for 6 points below
Teal for 8 points below
Magenta for 10 points below
Taupe for 12 points below
Eggshell glistening avocado green hazel for 14 points below

etc!!!

woooo! Nice colors. lol 🙂

Originally posted by KingDavid403
[b]I still like the warning signal the best, not so much that it alerts lazy clan leaders but it calls out the sandbaggers. Now that hit the nail on the head. 🙂 Emphasize calls out sandbaggers. They know their marked, might as well stop.[/b]

TER was already implemented successfully in the Tournament system, to fight the sandbagging..

By the way.. turned out that you did not know exactely what the term sandbagging stood for.. and if you really want to fight sandbagging even more, you shouldn't allow for a 350 points deviation (imagine a 1400 player lowering himself to 1100 and then play 1100's)..

Anyways, the point you're after, is the same as more people are after:
You don't want it to be possible to set up a 2100 vs. an 1800 player
You don't want it to be possible to set up a 1400 vs. an 1100 player
This is what happens now and what brings most points in..

Therefore, activating the TER and then making sure it's not possible to set up players against each other whose TER differentiates more than a 100 points, gives more leveled challenges!

On the other hand, take the flag example:
Player 1: high=1800 / current=1500
Player 2: high=1550 / current=1500
No flags, since they are within 350 points of their high
Match them up, player 1 will win 9 out of 10 times!

Make it 200 points:
Player 1: high=1700 / current=1525
Player 2: high=1550 / current=1525
No flags, etc etc..

Therefore, 2 things are needed at least:
- Tight spreads between high (365 days or longer, other discussion) and rating used for setting up challenge
- Make it impossible to match up players who deviate too much from each other
(in the flag situation, you show deviation, but you still allow for match ups.. which happens in the current situation, which is the true problem)

Originally posted by Amsterdamn
TER was already implemented successfully in the Tournament system, to fight the sandbagging..

By the way.. turned out that you did not know exactely what the term sandbagging stood for.. and if you really want to fight sandbagging even more, you shouldn't allow for a 350 points deviation (imagine a 1400 player lowering himself to 1100 and then play 110 ...[text shortened]... l allow for match ups.. which happens in the current situation, which is the true problem)

The flag is not to stop anybody from playing anybody. The flag is only to mark players whose rating is way below their normal rating. Nothing changes. Just a flag marking the much lower than normal rated player.

By the way.. turned out that you did not know exactely what the term sandbagging stood for.. And please explain how you came to this conclusion?

Originally posted by KingDavid403
The flag is not to stop anybody from playing anybody. The flag is only to mark players whose rating is way below their normal rating. Nothing changes. Just a flag marking the much lower than normal rated player.

[b]By the way.. turned out that you did not know exactely what the term sandbagging stood for.. And please explain how you came to this conclusion?[/b]

If nothing changes, if it's still possible to match up, than you have the same system as now!
Again, if you really study where points are gained, it's not because of sandbagging, but because we can all match up lopsided challenges!

As for the other conclusion, you said it yourself..
But to me more precise: you confuse sandbagging for matching up people with different ratings..

But this is all besides the point: if we want to change something, it has to exclude the possibility to match up players of significant different strenght

Originally posted by Amsterdamn
If nothing changes, if it's still possible to match up, than you have the same system as now!
Again, if you really study where points are gained, it's not because of sandbagging, but because we can all match up lopsided challenges!

As for the other conclusion, you said it yourself..
But to me more precise: you confuse sandbagging for matching up peop ...[text shortened]... thing, it has to exclude the possibility to match up players of significant different strenght

If nothing changes, if it's still possible to match up, than you have the same system as now! Correct. It just marks people whose rating is much below normal.

you confuse sandbagging for matching up people with different ratings..

No not at all. You can send me all the challenges you want matching your 1800 rated players against my 1300 rated players. lopsided challenges. I won't accept them, but some might.
But when you continually send me or anyone matches with your 1800 rated players under a cloak of 1300 rated, and match them against my 1300 rated players that's sandbagging. So why hide the difference in rating ?? Why should people be able to hide behind a cloak? The flag system would eliminate this possibility. And players all over the site would find that sandbagging to any great extent doesn't work anymore so might as well give it up and play all games to full strength.

A lopsided clan challenge sent is way different than a sandbagging challenge sent, by far.

Originally posted by KingDavid403
drdon,
Before you start blasting every clan leader that finds positives in this site idea, maybe you should worry more about making your own clan bigger and more active. You've started less than 20 clan challenges in the last 14 months. Mostly 2 person challenges and Nothing bigger than a 3 person challenge. Not much work in finding sandbaggers ...[text shortened]... NG" "WARNING" would even work better to stop the sandbagging problem than the flags. 🙄

There are many clan leaders on this site Your Holiness. I don't see too many finding positives, apart from the hot air of a couple. There is a lot of silence about this silly idea. If Your Highness finds it too hot, get out of the kitchen before you start whining about the workload of clan leaders. Your choice. Stick with the consequences of your apparent megalomania before asking the site admins to help you out.

Originally posted by my2sons
I suppose using the TER rating for clan challenges is better than nothing, but it can also be manupulated by determined sandbaggers.

I still like the warning signal the best, not so much that it alerts lazy clan leaders but it calls out the sandbaggers.

my2sons

Which is why I suggested a sliding points scale for matches.

Sandbagging would still be a possibility but the reward for the clan would be minimal and the risk for a loss, high.

Originally posted by adramforall
Which is why I suggested a sliding points scale for matches.

Sandbagging would still be a possibility but the reward for the clan would be minimal and the risk for a loss, high.

That's the point. I'm not sure why site administrators should be rushing to the aid of lazy clan leaders, Sandbagging is usually so obvious that it does not need an add-on system to combat it. I'm certain that any system for 'calling out' determined sandbaggers would be so convoluted that it would not be worth the trouble.

Originally posted by drdon
That's the point. I'm not sure why site administrators should be rushing to the aid of lazy clan leaders, Sandbagging is usually so obvious that it does not need an add-on system to combat it. I'm certain that any system for 'calling out' determined sandbaggers would be so convoluted that it would not be worth the trouble.

"you have hit the nail on the head"