FREE - In Google Play
FREE - in Win Phone Store
10/5/17 @ 6:22 PM
Hello, Erik !
Have You ever considered to cut down the Match Points from Groups, who do not have a proper recruiting standards ?
I wonder, what would happen amongst Match Admins after noticing there fines / cut downs in their Leader Board Points.
The same method could be used @ :
If You are a Wise Online Guy, You will use Match Admins as the First Line of Defense against cheaters.
Autumnal Greetings from Orange Finland
by Lauri Aikio.
Yes, Lapland is so wonderful in Autumn
As far as the match points for groups i think is a very good idea but...
what are the proper reqruiting standards?
Not recruiting probable "engineers" nor banned new-namers. They do often join in their old groups. ADMINS ! BE AWARE !!!
ah, I see what you mean now, so we need to make a rule
in this case my suggestion is that if in a team match one or two players will be proved "engineers' after the match have finished all the points to be deducted by the winner automatically
One 'engineer' is enough if the match is from 1-40 players
and 2 'engineers' will be enough if the match is over 40 players
In this way the admins will be carefull who will play for their teams
well, it is just an idea as a general rule, because these teams not only win the match points but their winning percentage gets higher and higher.
At least it would be fairer if one of these two indicators i.e, the total number of match points includes the penalties for cheating in order that someone can deduce safe conclusions by comparing the 2 indicators
The teams with cheaters will have very high winning percentages but relatively low match points
If some group can beat the KF64, that's brilliant !
Very good statistics
If there's gonna be an "efficiency" ratio of the total match points per matches played may be your team KF64 is really on the first place of the board
No, I think team Russia has the biggest ratio near 190
because it's a big team and gives matches with a big number of players and gets a lot of match points, but yours is also very good, near 50
But it will be fairer anyway if there is a penalty for the teams who win using cheaters, and with this austere rule not only the statistical result will be very close to real team value but it will prevent potential cheaters join the teams because they will not play
In this way in a depth of time the site will be clean from cheaters because they will not get one more chance easily
My take on all of this that, it seems to me that obligating Erik to do anything isn't necessarily your best recourse. I am recommending that you form a league of teams and from those teams, elect a group of admins to form a committee, that creates a set of guidelines for entry, play and banishment. Otherwise, you are putting Erik in a position that he has to change the rules for the site and the way the site's programming is in operation. Also, it wouldn't be fitting in my mind to demand that "private clubs", with no interest in adhering to any such hypothetical guidelines, be subjected to a rule change.
My thought is, if they aren't interested in a league affiliation and strict guidelines for entry, play and banishment, you probably shouldn't play with them anyway. It is also a difficult task to expect each team to provide a cheat detection specialist. Not all of them would be equally endowed anyway. You could train people, who are willing to learn, but I find you would be better off adding those types of teams, after formation of a league.
If I were starting a team or a league, I would want to see 500 moves of theirs in unclear positions and compare them to honest players, before even accepting them onto my team. I would also reserve the right to banish people by my own guidelines and make the player appeal to Chess.com or the committee for reentry. I was eventually going to start an Honest Players Club and police it myself, with cheat detection more stringent than Chess.com has, but that is in the future.
I have the 2nd largest group on chess.com. Despite our size, we only have a match win percentage of 40%. This seems to be due to the fact that many teams are constructed to win matches by only recruiting players with higher than average ratings. Part of my teaching philosophy is to improve, one needs to play stronger players. As we are most often out ranked in team matches, we lose 60% of them, but my team members get to play a stronger player a couple games, and ideally, improve. Plus many do score an upset win.
I see all kinds of results in team matches which bother me. Some players who are outranked resign rather than play and learn something. It seems inevitable someone times out because they didn't bother on going on vacation, or the game is hopeless. Some close their accounts and forfeit. Many players are banned for cheating. I've had a team member banned for cheating and before his games are timed out, his opponent is banned for cheating. The other team gets the match points when neither team deserves them. Some time the cheater wins both games and sometimes he's banned in the first few moves.
My group has too many members for me to keep track of offenders who cause problems above and enter another match and repeat the offense.
Require a premium membership for players who leave a team match without a fair attempt to complete their games if they wish to enter another team match, or tournament. Allow them to use the Let's Play if they wish to play corresepiondence chess. (Daily Chess is a bad name for correspondence chess and should also be changed. I'm from the old breed of correspondence chess players, I won a gold medal for Team USA back in the 1990s, Pacific Area Team Tournament #3. Thus I keep calling i by what it is/was. THe post office is simply out of the equation now, transmission of moves is instant).
If any player is banned for cheating while a match is underway, the results are removed from the match score. Simply highlight the board, and/or slide it to the bottom of the results. My group is in a match with King Fishers which we may win or tie beause of a 3-1 score from cheaters. KF and I agreed to not count the results from those boards, but we could win the match and still lose it. This means we get credit for a match we didn't win. My proposal eliminates those results from the record before it's official.
Don't you think that you guys value too much games that mean nothing else except maybe experimenting and learning?
So what's the big deal if a team has 40% and another has higher or lower?
What's the big deal if a match ends 15-13 because of a cheater and not 13-13?
Side note , chess history doesn't record what happens in chess.com or any other site.
None will ever care if in the specific match your team lost or won.So what remains?What's the essence?Learning and fun.
That is on line chess:Learning and fun.The results , the rating , the winning percentages of the teams and other nice numbers are totally irrelevant and insignificant.Aren't they?
If they are all so irrelevant in everyone's mind, why have so many people gone through the effort of putting those things in place to begin with ?
what was your previous account DierdreSkye ?
lol .... a similar thought crossed my mind
Thank You, Bill !
The truth is that Your Group is winning Our match with 3 cheater points @ :
You have had 7 months by now to sort it out.
Don't You have any auctority in Your Group ??
I have all the authority, I am only admin. but I don't know what I could sort out other than what we agreed to do, not count those boards and have an adjusted match score.
Are You saying that a National Master from USA cannot command his own troops !?
No wonder, there's this low moral @ Chess.com, Dear Bill.
Please, do shape up, man !!