Forums

Purposely aborting a losing game

Sort:
Scorpyoon89
Martin_Stahl wrote:

The Sportsmanship Policy will ding you. Depends on how often you do it whether or not you'll get any restrictions. It's best to just play it out.

 

Those Arena pairings with 300-2500 Elo difference between players... I consider them a severe abuse from chess.com's side. Generally, I wouldn't generally care about them, but now, with the Leagues tournament, there is another side to the story.

They (you) provide a way to get free wins for the top rated players. You facilitate that to them, along with the long winning streaks, the arena points and trophies bonuses.

I don't want to waste time with almost guaranteed losses, along with not feeding them free wins myself, in the competition we're directly competing.

AND...

You tell me...

It's best to just play it out, because....

The sportmanship policy will ding me. Really? The problem here is me?

 

P.S.: You, chess.com, have roughly 2 days left to at least partially solve this intentional abuse from your side, at least before the Champion division starts and people start rushing for the money prizes.

Since you can't restrict high Elo players from joining Arenas (hard to decide where's the max Elo limit), you could at least remove the Trophy bonuses from playing Arenas.

Unless, of course, you don't give a damn about fair play and this was intended from first day, because it allows you to at least partially handpick only high Elo players to reach the prizes.

Martin_Stahl
Scorpyoon89 wrote:

 

Those Arena pairings with 300-2500 Elo difference between players... I consider them a severe abuse from chess.com's side. Generally, I wouldn't generally care about them, but now, with the Leagues tournament, there is another side to the story.

They (you) provide a way to get free wins for the top rated players. You facilitate that to them, along with the long winning streaks, the arena points and trophies bonuses.

I don't want to waste time with almost guaranteed losses, along with not feeding them free wins myself, in the competition we're directly competing.

AND...

You tell me...

It's best to just play it out, because....

The sportmanship policy will ding me. Really? The problem here is me?

 

P.S.: You, chess.com, have roughly 2 days left to at least partially solve this intentional abuse from your side, at least before the Champion division starts and people start rushing for the money prizes.

Since you can't restrict high Elo players from joining Arenas (hard to decide where's the max Elo limit), you could at least remove the Trophy bonuses from playing Arenas.

Unless, of course, you don't give a damn about fair play and this was intended from first day, because it allows you to at least partially handpick only high Elo players to reach the prizes.

 

It seems that that majority of players that are likely to be in the first Champion division are going to be non-titled players. 

 

Even if the site decided, for some reason, to restrict titled players, then there would still be higher rated players in the Arenas that would have an easier time of it, from a leagues standpoint. The arena bonuses existed in the beta and continue to, so I don't see that changing at all. I believe that was part of the design to increase arena participation, though it certainly isn't required to compete.


I have nothing to do with anything going on with the leagues, other than just answering questions when I can and trying to find out and get clarification when I can't. 

Scorpyoon89

@Martin_Stahl

Right now, in Elite global leaderboard, first player to not have touched Arena tournaments... is on 47th place.

At first sight, the player with the most trophies from Arena points.... has 3752 of them.

In an environment (Arena tournaments) where you (the site) allow high/very high Elo players to have 70-99% win rates because they keep being matched against players  even 2500 Elo below them, are you seriously saying that Arena tournaments aren't required to compete?

3752 Arena points translates into:

/3 --> 1250 non-Arena Bullet Wins (Wins, not just matches)

/9 = 416 non-Arena Blitz Wins

Those are just the extra wins someone would need to just reach par with the most active arena players.

For a casual middle/low Elo player who will win 50% of matches, by not abusing arena, like you allow high Elo players, those numbers of Wins turn into double amount of matches.

So, intentionally playing only against lower rated players is not allowed, unless you're high Elo and you're doing it in Arena tournaments, right?

Scorpyoon89
Martin_Stahl wrote:

It seems that that majority of players that are likely to be in the first Champion division are going to be non-titled players. 

 

11 out of top 18 in Elite right now are titled. From the remaining 7 players, 6 are 2100-2700 at either Blitz or Bullet.

''Majority'' is irrelevant when the top 10 in Champion division will literally prove my point.

At that moment, I hope the people behind the tournament will get all the blessings they deserve, from all the simple low Elo motivated players who spent days or weeks to get there, sacrificing even sleep sometimes.

Because you're screwing them in a major way, intentionally, by being prejudiced towards the high Elo players.

There is nothing fair here, as you annihilate the winning chances to 95-99% of the community.

Martin_Stahl
Scorpyoon89 wrote:
...

So, intentionally playing only against lower rated players is not allowed, unless you're high Elo and you're doing it in Arena tournaments, right?

 

Playing in arenas is playing random opponents. There's nothing stopping any other strong or titled players from playing in them, so it is not specifically trying to only play lower rated opponents.

Martin_Stahl
Scorpyoon89 wrote:
Martin_Stahl wrote:

It seems that that majority of players that are likely to be in the first Champion division are going to be non-titled players. 

 

11 out of top 18 in Elite right now are titled. From the remaining 7 players, 6 are 2100-2700 at either Blitz or Bullet.

''Majority'' is irrelevant when the top 10 in Champion division will literally prove my point.

At that moment, I hope the people behind the tournament will get all the blessings they deserve, from all the simple low Elo motivated players who spent days or weeks to get there, sacrificing even sleep sometimes.

Because you're screwing them in a major way, intentionally, by being prejudiced towards the high Elo players.

There is nothing fair here, as you annihilate the winning chances to 95-99% of the community.

 

I don't have the time to look but some of the members in the top may be in the same divisions and can potentially knock each other out.  And titled players are only 14 out of the top 50, so as I said, the majority are not titled wink.png

NervesofButter

Never understood this aborting thing.  A loss is a loss.  I would imagine that aborting gives the person the satisfaction of making them wait for the win.

Scorpyoon89
Martin_Stahl wrote:

Playing in arenas is playing random opponents. There's nothing stopping any other strong or titled players from playing in them, so it is not specifically trying to only play lower rated opponents.

I'm about to cry, as you seem blind to the issue.

High Elo players (titled/strong players) ONLY play against weaker players, with lower Elo.

You allow them to have 70-99% win rate, which is absolutely decisive for Leagues tournament.

 

Anyone with Elo below 2000 will actually get a random matchmaking, mostly around their Elo, as you claim, which leads to roughly ~50% win rate long term.

 

If a 2200+ Elo player plays only Arena tournaments for 7 days, a <2000 Elo will need 10+ days to reach the same amount of trophies.

Scorpyoon89
NervesofButter wrote:

Never understood this aborting thing.  A loss is a loss.  I would imagine that aborting gives the person the satisfaction of making them wait for the win.

 

Aborting a match = no 10 moves made. You still lose rating, but the winner doesn't get trophies.

Scorpyoon89

Funny how you can't resign before 10th move in Arena. It's as if the website owners created the abuse window on purpose for the high Elo players.

Martin_Stahl
Scorpyoon89 wrote:

I'm about to cry, as you seem blind to the issue.

High Elo players (titled/strong players) ONLY play against weaker players, with lower Elo.

You allow them to have 70-99% win rate, which is absolutely decisive for Leagues tournament.

 

Anyone with Elo below 2000 will actually get a random matchmaking, mostly around their Elo, as you claim, which leads to roughly ~50% win rate long term.

 

If a 2200+ Elo player plays only Arena tournaments for 7 days, a <2000 Elo will need 10+ days to reach the same amount of trophies.

 

I'm not blind to the issue. It's just that unless a lot if higher rated or titled players enter an arena, that's how it works; the higher rated players will tend to get a lower than average opponent rating. It's also likely a reason that in many arenas, very few higher rated and titled players normally played in them, before leagues. They risk losing a lot of rating and only gaining a minimum amount.

 

Before leagues, a lot of members bemoaned the fact that higher rated players don't like to play lower rated ones. Leagues, in particular the contest, incentivizes them to play. From everything I've seen, that is something that is seen as a benefit by staff, even with leagues.

 

The leaderboards also show that any rating can do well overall, so based on the actual utilization, it probably doesn't have as much impact as you expect it does.

Martin_Stahl
Scorpyoon89 wrote:

Funny how you can't resign before 10th move in Arena. It's as if the website owners created the abuse window on purpose for the high Elo players.

 

That rule impacts everyone equally. I blunder sometimes in the first 10 moves, a mixture of premoves, misclicks, miscalculations, or distractions/concentrations. It's been in place for a long time. Pretty sure it had nothing to do with benefiting high rated players.

Scorpyoon89

Coincidence then. My bad. 

My previous statements stand still though. Arena tournaments are decisively biased towards 2200+ Elo players.

Higher the Elo, more obvious the advantage.

 

The most active <2000 Elo simply can't compete in the Leagues tournament, because highest Elos will simply win even up to 99% of matches, almost all of them against lower rated players (ONLY IN ARENA TOURNAMENTS).

This is your doing. You allow it. It's your way to be prejudiced. It's how you make sure the tournament will not be won by some casual 1400 Elo, even if he plays 22 hours/day.

 

Meanwhile, you state that it's not allowed to ''game the system'' by (among other things) intentionally playing only against lower rated players.

Finally, I can wholeheartedly say that you, the organizers, are abusive. I will keep saying that every day, as I crawl around, still trying to compete, even if I don't have a chance, simply because I'm committed, after spending too many days to get here.

Scorpyoon89

 

After losing 4 out of 4 matches in arena, the 5th was this.

Thanks chess.com for the privilege of playing with someone 1100 Elo higher than me.

Respectfully, patiently waiting for my punishment for abandoning these matches.

Abusive, prejudiced incompetents.

FriendlyBeetle
I have been loosing all my games for more than a week, for lag - connection error. I was doing decent till then reached silvers. My internet is good and no issue with it. I tried to delete and reinstall the app, but no use.
Sail4ever
In the Middle of the game, the system suddenly declared the opponent as winner, even though there where no check mate. Why this has happened?
Martin_Stahl
Sail4ever wrote:
In the Middle of the game, the system suddenly declared the opponent as winner, even though there where no check mate. Why this has happened?

 

Generally that's a sign of a disconnect from the live server process.

https://support.chess.com/article/213-how-do-i-fix-my-disconnect-lag-issues