Furthering the discussion of "ethics"

Is this allowed, or should it be allowed?https://www.chess.com/variants/chaturaji/game/83370040/14/2

Yellow sacced a bishop on move 3 to allow red to capture it and forcibly mate me.

Of course giving red a 5 point bishop + 3 points for my king, while losing your own bishop is terrible for yellow. Sure enough, yellow came third.  Yellow simply targeted me due to my rating, costing me 40 rating points, even at the cost of throwing the game for himself. Should that be allowed? 

@reysbull this is just a issue this this player Jonny. He is very reckless.

It's hard to say what should or shouldn't be "allowed" here. I don't think that's sportsmanlike play, for what that's worth.

I suggest playing anon more often, as it deals with this specific issue

its hard with 1500s btw when you said is this allowed di thought you meant me

Rules can prevent obvious targeting. If you join a game and aren't trying to win for whatever reason, due to prearranged teaming with another player,(against the rules) targeting etc. there should be a penalty. This of course is only the case when targeting makes your position significantly worse.

Well, sure, but my point was more about blurring the line between unconventional tactics and teaming. I was once in a game where the player to my left sacced a bishop to the player to my right in such a way as to checkmate me. Did yellow give green five points for nothing? Technically. But his left player was out after, so he had no pressure in that direction for the whole game, and he went on to win first. I don't think it was teaming. Actually, looking at the position, it was pretty much exactly what you posted.

In any case, it seems like a legit tactic to me. A bit unsavory, perhaps, but that's another issue, far beyond the reach of rules.

I'd be hard pressed to believe the game you are referencing was a high level game. I think your view is a bit naïve - in a game like Chaturaji where the pieces are so limited and points come at a premium - giving up one of your two heavy pieces AND 8 points to another player is never worth the trade off of relieving pressure from the player on your right. I would never consider playing this move in my own game even if Magnus Carlsen is the player on my right. It is simply self destructive.

If u can show me a (high elo) game where this move was played and the player who played it went on to win, I would change my mind. As it stands, i do not see it as anything more than targeting.

@Lev_Z2017 that looks cool but that is not really relevant to this forum topic. Please feel free to post a forum about stand chess positions.

The player who did it and took first was at least 2,300+. In fact, it may very well be the same player. I will shoot him a message to ask him if he remembers doing it to me.

The main problem I see with what you're suggesting is the question of just how far these things could be interpreted. Right now the rules say 'teaming' is not allowed--whatever that means. Is planning to trade bishops with your opposite 'teaming'? Reasonably, I don't think it can be considered as such, but it sure can look like it. I suppose there could be an effort to catalogue every move that counts as 'teaming' but that seems ineffective and unnecessary. Obviously, we hope we have moderators who have a balanced but strict interpretation of what 'teaming' is, and I think we probably do. I haven't played too many games with moderators, but they always seem very sensible about the whole business.

At high level raji so, so many things happen that can be at least considered 'soft teaming' but in reality are nothing more than players being opportunistic and thus taking advantage of a weakened position. It seems to be an 'issue' (I don't think it's an issue at all, really) with FFA 4p chess in general.

I think @Dragonhorde made a good point. The metric should be if the same tactic could and would be utilized in fully anon games.

I dunno, I'm just kind of rambling. I'm glad you brought it up, because it's a good discussion point!

@bird-seed from what I've seen, this tactic is very very rare in elite games and for good reason. The person doing the sac will mostly not win because they are down a piece without the points they would get by trading down.  Also this is not technically a form of teaming since it is just one player making a selfish move to kill someone's game. Personally I think if any individual keeps doing this act, then they should get reported and not allowed anywhere near this club.

Fair enough. I think it's a trickier question than some others about teaming/ethics. It's a good discussion point, for sure!

wow is coll

I just played a game with him, it reminded me of this article: https://www.chess.com/variants/chaturaji/game/86260876

Yes and this game is a good example of why this tatic is so rare...

And he was third again lol. Totally self destructive "tactic"

Prime example of karma not in fact working:
https://www.chess.com/variants/chaturaji/game/89418163/227/1