Site Ideas
01 Dec 06
07 Dec 06
Originally posted by GatecrasherI accept your point, if someone does actually beat an engine user and the other players get automatic wins against him, this good player has a reason to feel cheated, i accept that. But the current system ALREADY DOES THAT! Why should some people who play slowly be given a win? That is madness and doesn't treat all of the victims equally! Either strip everyone of wins against a banned player, or award them all wins, it makes no difference. Giving some people free points and allowing others to suffer losses to an engine is stupid (that means they are not only robbed of rating, they are disadvantaged in their tournament as well). 95% of this site don't have a prayer of getting anything out of fritz, yet some people are getting a free lunch, why?
And if someone beats the cheat, or in an incomplete game was winning, those games should be cancelled too?
Is the effect of cancelling all the games sufficient "punishment" for the clan who fielded the cheat? The total effect would be the same as if the engine user had drawn all his games? That hardly seem fair or appropriate.
I really don't thin ...[text shortened]... e is to zero all points won by the cheat for his clan in the currently active clan leagues.
07 Dec 06
2 edits
Originally posted by MarinkatombIt makes a big difference to the clan who fielded the banned player. They get 0 points in either case, but their opponents share either 0 points or 54 points. That can certainly effect the outcome of the league.
Either strip everyone of wins against a banned player, or award them all wins, it makes no difference.
Giving some people free points and allowing others to suffer losses to an engine is stupid (that means they are not only robbed of rating, they are disadvantaged in their tournament as well). 95% of this site don't have a prayer of getting anything out of fritz, yet some people are getting a free lunch, why?
Because it is just not practical to undo all the damage caused by an engine user. Recalculation of ratings would be a nightmare. Re-awarding of past tournaments: a nightmare. Readjusting past clan challenges: a nightmare. And so on.
The principla that has been applied at RHP is to basically say "Sorry it happened, but what's done is done. To the extent that a game or event is unresolved we will make ammends." Hence resigning the banned players remaining games (with no rating adjustments) and zeroing the points earned by the player in tournament rounds.
All that's been lacking until now is the zeroing of the banned player's points in the clan leagues.
It boils down to whether the opponents in a cheat's active games should be awarded the "win". That is how it is done in tournaments (and all other games). The player is awarded a win. The is no cancellation mechanism. A draw is also not appropriate. A loss is totaly unacceptable.
Being awarded no points in the league, yet winning the game would require some serious programming logic. As would an award of 3 points for a loss. Yet stripping a cheat of the points earned is relatively simple code.
In the absence of a perfectly solution, I'm sure a practical solution is better than no solution at all.
07 Dec 06
Originally posted by GatecrasherHold on, i never said anything about recalculation of ratings, that is obviously impossible. I'm talking about the round results of a tournament.
It makes a big difference to the clan who fielded the banned player. They get 0 points in either case, but their opponents share either 0 points or 54 points. That can certainly effect the outcome of the league.
[b]Giving some people free points and allowing others to suffer losses to an engine is stupid (that means they are not only robbed of rating ...[text shortened]... a perfectly solution, I'm sure a practical solution is better than no solution at all.
07 Dec 06
1 edit
Originally posted by MarinkatombI mentioned it as an example of the nightmare of trying to undo the past.
Hold on, i never said anything about recalculation of ratings, that is obviously impossible. I'm talking about the round results of a tournament.
So if player C is a cheat and gets banned, but player A has beaten C while player B has lost to C, should player A get 3 points or no points in the tournament? Should player B get 3 points or no points? What if player A opts for a quick draw with player D in another game on the basis of those 3 points he thought he earned against C, and then gets stripped of them?
Things can get very messy.
07 Dec 06
2 edits
Originally posted by GatecrasherA) I can't help feeling this is harsh on the clan that fielded the engine user. You can't seriously expect clan leaders to do an engine analysis of the games of their membership soley to make sure they aren't fielding engine users (which in any case isn't the only way people can be banned). So it's not clear to me why the clan the offender was in should be punished, as it's not easy to tell if someone is using an engine or not without doing lots of work.
[edits: Cut out stuff I wasn't responding to]
A)
It makes a big difference to the clan who fielded the banned player. They get 0 points in either case, but their opponents share either 0 points or 54 points. That can certainly effect the outcome of the league.
B)
Being awarded no points in the league, yet winning the game would require some s ...[text shortened]... d of 3 points for a loss. Yet stripping a cheat of the points earned is relatively simple code.
B) I doubt that it would be that hard to get the system to not award points when the game is resigned due to a banning, although the testing involved might put Russ & co. off. That's a technical issue though, I don't think that it's neccessarily right to do that in any case. I'm more convinced by your "where does it end argument" - a retrospective ratings calculations would involve a serious piece of number crunching on a huge database (long inactive player's accounts would have to be updated as well as the 15,000 odd current players) which would probably mean noone could make moves while the ratings were being adjusted...
07 Dec 06
Originally posted by DeepThoughtSympathy to the clan, but it is rather like a football team that has a player sent off in the cup final - the team is penalised by playing with 10 men, not 11.
A) I can't help feeling this is harsh on the clan that fielded the engine user. You can't seriously expect clan leaders to do an engine analysis of the games of their membership soley to make sure they aren't fielding engine users (which in any case isn't the only way people can be banned). So it's not clear to me why the clan the offender was in shoul ...[text shortened]... as it's not easy to tell if someone is using an engine or not without doing lots of work.
It is a team event, after all.
- Joined
- 06 Aug 05
- Moves
- 42926
22 Dec 06
There is something else to consider in this thread. When a team has six players and say that board 2 is discovered to be a computer cheat, you have to consider that all the players from board 3 to 6 have had easier games than they should have, giving a slight advantage to the team containing the computer cheater.
And if a team is discovered to have 2 computer cheaters???
24 Dec 06
Originally posted by GatecrasherWouldn't a comparison to a football team paying off the other teams goalkeeper be better? If that happened they may well get demoted or points deducted whereas a sending off for a foul is part of the normal rules.
Sympathy to the clan, but it is rather like a football team that has a player sent off in the cup final - the team is penalised by playing with 10 men, not 11.
It is a team event, after all.
Just wondering - obviously doesn't affect me.