GrayMatter Ladder Chess Discussion

Please use this forum topic to discuss anything related to GrayMatter Ladder Chess - questions, problems, ideas, etc.

Yeah so I beat Calvinist, now where on the other site am I supposed to tell you? Is my ranking I spent time getting here obsolete?  Now that we've merged everyone can be challenged?  Is it still only just 3 ranks above you?  Are the people who didnt join going to lose their ranking?  I cant tell which page on the new site Im supposed to challenge people on what is it?  Im sorry if you already said but I really need to now the answers

Congratulations - you are the first to win a match on the new ladder!

Happy to help.  The procedures are simple - just a bit different than what we've gotten used to.  So let me go through it step by step of what to do when the match is complete (you'll not be the only one who wants this).

• First, check out the brief instructions here.  (For more details go here.).
• There are a couple of simple things that are different.  For one, the results don't get reported to me, but to the ladder (well, the software that maintains it) in the Ladder House.  The other is that the LOSER of the match is the one who does the reporting. 
• The player who loses the match (in this case, Calvinist) goes to the "Standings" page which is located here.  He uses the "Report Loss" tab and simply follows directions.  The next time the Standings page loads (or when you click on Update) the position of the rungs on the ladder will have automatically been updated.  No waiting, no human error, etc.  It is the responsibility of the loser of the match to report the loss within a maximum of 24 hours of the game's completion.  This keeps players from falsely reporting wins that they have not earned (the Ladder House only knows what we tell it, it doesn't monitor the actual games here on CHESS.COM).
• If, however, the winner of a match determines that the loser has not reported the loss, then the winner should use the "Unreported Match" tab under "Support" in the Ladder House and follow the instructions.

That's it.  You'll find it simple and logical.

You also asked about whom you may challenge.  The answer is simple: anyone on the ladder.  No limitations about number of rungs above you.  You can also have the game be any type that CHESS.COM has (i.e. length of time, rated/unrated, etc. - even a 'live' chess match!) - just so you and the person you challenge both agree to it.  You can also challenge and play multiple ladder games at once against as many people as you please.  Just be aware that along with that flexibility comes the fact that people can ignore or refulse challenges for whatever reason they want.  Don't worry, there is a special kind of challenge you can use if people are unfairly hogging their rung or blocking the way up (by refusing challenges).  See the "All You Need To Know" information in the forum here and read about "Formal Challenges."  Normally, however, you'll not have a problem finding a good game on the ladder.

You don't actually challenge people in the Ladder House - instead you use the information from the ladder standings there to decide who you want to challenge and then you invite a player on CHESS.COM to a ladder match just like in the past.  And then afterwards the loser reports the loss in the Ladder House.

People who don't join the new ladder at the Ladder House won't be playing on a GrayMatter Ladder once their current 2-day or 5-day matches are completed.  All new ladder challenges are based on the new ladder.

I hope that answers your questions.  If not, ask.  Oh yes, do read the two informational forum topics noted above - for most all the questions people will have should be answered there.

Good chess!

I had already won a match on the previous format, but am still below her.

I have now challenged the following players to matches using the new system:

craftysusie

gvs567

tooeasy1

I'll let you know the outcomes.

Thanks, Craig.

Hey Craig - thanks for your message.  I'm not 100% sure who you're referring to with your first sentance.  Since you were on both of the previous ladders it is possible that the relative position between a given player on one of them didn't get reflected the way you might expect when we merged the two ladders. 

If you got a win that wasn't reflected on the new ladder, please let me know so we can rectify that.  Any changes of position as a result would be based on the new ladder, not the old.

Anyway, the good news is that you can now challenge ANYONE you want on the new ladder.  I noticed you challenged the people immediately above you - and that's absolutely fine.  But you could go after anyone. 

B.t.w, as you may know you don't need to report in that you've challenged someone unless you particularly want to for some reason - just make sure the loser of the match reports the loss using the "Report Match" link on the "Standings" page at the LadderHouse.  If there is any confusion here let me try to help.  Check out first the couple of paragraphs on the bottom of the "Standings" pages and then the two documents in the forum here.

Graybeard

Here are a couple of questions that I recently received from rdallison - who was at the top of the 5-day ladder and is also on the top rung of the new ladder.  His questions were good ones that might be helpful for others to know the answers to, so let me try to answer them here.  Hope you don't mind me taking this liberty, rdallison!

QUOTE:

I was just challenged to a ladder match by one Lebeast, who appears at the bottom of the old ladder (too far away to challenge me), but not on myleague.com. Any idea why his name is not visible in the list of registered members?

Also I note that there are automatic penalties for inactivity, designed supposedly to prevent people "blocking the ladder". I am confused about a couple of things here.

"Blocking the ladder" implies that a player is refusing to respond to normal challenges. In this case the correct procedure is for another player to issue a formal challenge, which cannot be refused without incurring a penalty.

If on the other hand nobody is challenging the inactive player, then his or her position will naturally "erode" as lower-ranked players beat higher-ranked players. But in this case the inactive player is not blocking anyone... so why the penalty?

There is also one special case (which happens to apply to me at this moment) - that of player ranked #1 on the ladder. Why would that person be penalized for inactivity after 30 days, if nobody else chooses to challenge him or her? This seems quite unfair... While of course the #1 player could challenge lower-ranked players, this is a very artificial constraint that goes directly against the goal of reaching the top of the ladder!

Thanks anyway for continuing to administer this whole thing. I'm not convinced that switching to myleague.com will reduce your workload a great deal, but I certainly hope for you that it does!

Best regards

Graybeard's Response:

Hello and thanks for your message.  Hope you don't mind me posting it here in the forum so others can get the benefit (?!) of my response...

It is clear that you have a good understanding of how the new ladder works.  I know it is different and for some it may take some getting used to.  But good to know my efforts at communication have cleared up some potential confusion...

About the challenge from someone who is not currently listed in the standings.  In this case Lebeast was formerly on rung #17 but got bumped down because of failure to report a loss which his opponent had to report.  Because he was already at the bottom rung the system took him down to an 'unranked' position.  If you adjust the filter on the Standings page as indicated (is=0 and then hit update) you'll see him.  The 'unranked position' is where new players on the ladder enter - since everyon who has joined so far was positioned on the ladder based on their previous standings on the former ladders, we've not had unranked players up until now).  Unranked players gain a rung either by winning a challenge with another unranked player (in which case they take the lowest rung) or by winning a challenge with a ranked player.  You're rank #1 so if he were to beat you he would move 50% of the way up the ladder.  Make sense about this challenge?

You're correct about inactivity and formal challenges.  But it is not correct that inactive players' positions 'erode' downward unless they happen to be on a rung when a player below them wins against a player above them in which case (depending on the relative postion of the winner and loser) it is possible that players inbetween will be pushed down a rung - but that depends on the circumstances.  See The Most You Need To Know document in the forum for details.

You are correct about the unusual situation which applies to the top runged player in the case of inactivity.  That is simply the way the system on MyLeagues works - it is not possible to single out the top rung and have the inactivity settings work differently for that one person.  Maybe the old military adage applies here: "Rank has its privileges - rank has its responsibilities"!  I suppose the assumption (a fair one, I think) is that if you're on the ladder the point is not only getting to the top, but also enjoying good competition.  In this particular case I would encourage you to accept the challenge from Lebeast - he is new to the GrayMatter group and appears to be a strong player with a good rating (over 2100 if I'm not mistaken) so it would be a good match up for you.  But that, of course, is totally up to you at this point.

Well, we'll see if this indeed ends up being less tedious for me than the old approach.  My suspicion is that once we get the bumps ironed out and everyone oriented to the system about the only real intervention on my part (or other administrators) would be handling those cases where a player won a game but where the loser failed to report it.  Since that does have penalties associated with it my assumption is that people will be motivated to report their losses.  It is clear, however, that until the new approach becomes more familiar to everyone that such things may inadvertantly happen.  I'm sure that was the case with Lebeast - no malicious intent involved!  Anyway, I don't mind helping people and answering questions - the tedium for me was the mechanics of needing to update the ladder virtually daily on a spreadsheet and then manually making sure I did it right (which I was not always successful in doing) and then cutting and pasting both updated spreadsheets to the forum posts, etc.  That is now a thing of the past.

Thanks for your good comments and questions.  Don't hesitate asking further...

Graybeard

Thanks for the detailed response Graybeard.

Of course I have accepted Lebeast's challenge. I'm all about making this ladder active and fun, so you'll not catch me declining challenges.

I guess my question was what happens if nobody challenges the #1 ranked player for 30 days? He or she is then obliged to go looking for a lower-ranked opponent and put the #1 rank in play? What happens if nobody wants to play...?

No big deal, it probably won't happen very often.

Ciao - Rob

Right, Rob.  Probably won't happen very often.  Unless with those cool new dark glasses everyone is intimidated by you...

There may be some way for me to adjust or 'reset' an individual player's inactivity/idle clock - I'm carrying on a conversation with MyLeague support about how to do that, so far I've not found a solution other than perhaps an Administrator declaring a win/loss (which does start the clock ticking) and then manually readjusting the win/loss stats and whatever change of rankings would have ensued from the false win.  But of course that is the kind of micromanaging all of this that I really need to get away from...  Perhaps that is something we would need to just handle if/when it presents itself.

Glad you're on board with the new ladder.  A couple of the higher rated players from before don't seem to have made the transition yet (Upabushtrack, Bentonious, tas58) - maybe a word from you might help?  Whatever - no pressure.  I can easily understand why folks might not want to make the switch!

Graybeard

Hi Graybeard,

I have won a game with craftysusie using the new ladder format.

Thanks and Blessings,

Craigallen99

Nice work.  I see that the loss was reported and the ladder standings adjusted properly.  The system is working!  Glad you made the transition!

Hi Graybeard

Back in November I thought I had understood how the new system was going to work (our posts above). It turns out I am very confused...

When we last corresponded in November, I ranked #1 on the ladder. Since then I have accepted all 3 challenges against me. One of these games is complete (win vs. craftysusie), and the other two are still in progress (vs. Lebeast and shillingmm).

Based on this activity, I should still be in #1 position on the ladder, with a record of 1-0.

However, the ladder system now shows me ranking #5 on the ladder, with a record of 2-0.

• Who reported a loss against me other than craftysusie? Whoever it is, we did not play!
• How come I have slipped 4 places on the ladder? Since I have responded to all 3 challenges coming my way, it cannot be for inactivity...

I'm sure there is a perfectly rational explanation, I am just not seeing it for some reason. Thanks in advance for helping me understand!

Ciao - Rob

Quick update. My game against shillingmm just ended (in a win for me), so the ladder now shows me ranked #4 with a 3-0 record (instead of #5 with a 2-0 record).

Re-reading my post above, and all your instructions and forum posts, I have to assume that I got bumped down the ladder for "inactivity".

Why is this? Well, I am guessing that MyLeague considers you inactive when you do not report a win/loss for more than 30 days. Not very fair, given that I have accepted three challenges since end November...

Bottom line: the automatic inactivity rule (based on 30 days without results) does not fit the timeline of our correspondence games here on chess.com.

Previously we were playing 2- or 5-days-per-move depending on the ladder; now the parameters are open, but I think most people are playing 2- or 3-days-per-move. This means that most games will last a couple of months at least... if not significantly longer.

So in reality a player could be extremely active, issuing and accepting a whole bunch of challenges, playing many ladder games simultaneously.

Due to the time required for these games to complete, at some point 30 days will almost certainly pass without there being a result to report. And bump bump bump, down the ladder you go... Not really very fair??

Maybe a fairer rule would be that you cannot let 30 days go by without issuing and/or accepting a challenge. But since myleague.com does not appear to know anything about active challenges, how would this work? Is there some way of using the "formal challenge" that would reset the inactivity clock?

Ciao - Rob 

Hi Rob,

I certainly understand the issue.  You are correct, the inactivity clock relates to games reported at completed.  This particular variable can be set to a different number of days (some variables can, some cannot) but the system doesn't know anything about normal challenges (it does know about the 'formal challenges').

Instead of 30 days, what would you recommend as the trip-wire for inactivity?

Thanks much!

Graybeard

Graybeard - hard to say really. I would think that 90 days would be enough for 90% of the games played on this ladder...

Ideally, activity vs inactivity should be determined based on the frequency of challenges issued or accepted, and not on the frequency of win/loss reports. Maybe worth asking MyLeague if this is somehow possible?

Whatever time lapse you select for win/loss reports, at some point it will be too short given the nature of correspondence chess. A 70-move game at 3 days per half-move could take over a year to complete!

Incidentally I think using "formal challenges" would not change anything. If you receive and accept a formal challenge, you are still subject to the "win/loss reporting" clock.

Please note that I am organizing a thematic tournament around my favorite opening, the Bird (1. f4).

All Ladder group members are warmly invited to join the tournament!

http://www.chess.com/tournament/thematic-bird

Rob

Well here I go again with my tired lament.

This morning I connected to MyLeague and saw that I was still in 2nd place with 29 days of inactivity. Now just a few hours later I connect again, and hey presto I've dropped to 8th place.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the 30-day "inactivity" penalty imposed by myleague.com makes no sense at all when we are playing correspondence games that can easily take longer than a month to play out.

This month I have been playing three Ladder games, at what for me is a sustained rhythm of at least one move per day - and yet I am still "timing out" on the ladder board.

I see that I am not the only one - overall I suspect there is more movement on the ladder due to inactivity penalties than to actual match results.

I greatly enjoy the ladder concept, and I think Graybeard has done a great job of getting this group started. However, it's no fun to earn your rung and then have it zapped by a system that does not accommodate the parameters of the game we are playing.

Unfortunately my enjoyment is really spoiled by this recurring issue, so unless there is some way to resolve this I will regretfully be retiring from the ladder... 

rdallison

Hi rdallison and other Graymatter group members,

I agree with Rob, I enjoyed the previous versions of the Graymatter ladder and do not like the current Myleague ladder.   Graybeard may be able to change the parameters, however, I think if he could he would have already done so.  I dropped out since I was the lowest ranked player and beating my head against  the wall (so to speak) trying to win games against players ranked way above me.  I enjoyed it while it lasted and being a member of the group was nice.  But all good thing end at some point and this is where we are today.  Maybe we could have team matches, vote chess. We could always challenge each other with friendly games.

Suzann

Hi all,

I feel your pain!  My own feeling is that this is not working well - perhaps for lots of reasons.  Many of the folks who were active did not make the transition to the new approach.  A good number of those who did have not been active on the MyLeague ladder.  Probably for a number of reasons.  My own sense is that the limited number of players on the ladder currently is a bit of a problem.  That may be reflected in Suzann's feeling that she was beating her head agains a wall.

The old system worked well, but over time became a burden for me - as I know you understand.  I'm not personally able to go back to handling it the old way (and I realize no one is expecting me to).

I've been wondering for some time what to do about it.  I see two options:

1.  If someone else wants to run the ladder the old way (or some modification thereof) I have no problem giving over the reins.  I have no sense of ownership and would be more than happy for someone to take it, run with, breathe new life into it, etc.  Any takers?

2.  I've also thought maybe I should just pull the plug.  I.e. disband it.  It was fun, seemed to work for a year or more, but if it's not working well now (and it doesn't seem to be) maybe it needs to be euthanatized.  (It is not a human, after all!)  I'd be good with that also.

What are people's thoughts?

Graybeard

Thanks for your thoughtful and constructive reply... as always :)

When we switched to myleague, I anticipated that there would be a significant drop-off, and indeed the group has shrunk dramatically. Using a different site is a barrier for many people.

Still, I like the ladder concept enough that I was ready to give myleague a try. After these first few months, I really don't think it's adapted to what we need.

At the same time I recognize how time consuming it was (and still would be) to manage the ladder by hand. If I had the bandwidth I would gladly volunteer, but it is truly not feasible for me to take this on.

So... What I really think (and have done since the start) is that chess.com would gain a lot by incorporating ladder play as a full-blown feature. It offers the challenge and excitement of a tournament combined with a lot more freedom in the parameters.

I know we've already discussed this, and several of us, myself included, have already approached Erik. There are no plans that I am aware of to add this as a feature.

Maybe this is a good time to put in a coordinated request? I'd be happy to chime in.

I would also be interested in knowing more about what's involved from the IT perspective (workload, resource profiles) since I work in the same IT world as Erik and could potentially help with logistics if this is not currently on his development plan.

Well that's it from me. Sorry to have put the cat among the pigeons. What counts is that this was (a) a great idea, (b) well executed thanks to Graybeard. It's a shame that a year later it's not already part of this site that we love so much!

Ciao for now
Rob

twitter @robdallison

Hi All,

I have not been in favor of the My League option for some time now. I rarely go there anymore. I would prefer to go back to keeping it all on one site; chess.com.

Unfortunately, I can't help with the admin. Blessings, Craig.