Board
Teamleague Forum
posted at 2016-07-12 18:31 by RiceFarmer
posted at 2016-07-13 13:57 by tseltzer
posted at 2016-07-13 14:06 by joshuar
And how to practically administer such a punishment? The bot uses the "log" command, finds the person who logged in last, and if the login was after the scheduled start time, starts the clock accordingly? What about when both players are logged in and one is afk? How about when both are late, even by a few minutes? Is it gentlemanly to then force users who do NOT wish to punish their opponents to then go to the game forum to reset the start time for a future time just to ensure neither is penalized?
posted at 2016-07-13 19:40 by ricefarmer
I don't subscribe to this spirit of fair play theory. How fair is it to make some one wait 30 minutes? I have suffered this many times. I always claim forfeit if someone wastes hours of my time - if I cannot make it on time I will gladly forfeit too - most times I have informed in the forum that I cannot play at that scheduled time and offered a full point
posted at 2016-07-14 02:30 by smallblackcat
As it stands now, when people are late by more than 30 minutes, or miss games entirely, some human intervention is needed to resolve these issues. Fortunately, this can be done in the TD's own time, as he/she can simply assess the situation based on the player's logs and posts in the game forum. By contrast, disputes resulting from clocks being set for players being late (and you can be assured that there would be disputes) would have to be resolved in real time. This would require a TL TD or admin to be online at all times, which is simply not possible.
You can't just find a technological solution to this for the same reason that you can't do so with forfeits in general - the human element is essential. In OTB events this is no problem, you simply need an arbiter (or several) on hand in one venue. TL is different from OTB tourneys in a number of ways, and unfortunately this is one of them.
Now, if we were talking about reducing the grace period, that would be another matter. I can't recall this matter being discussed in the past, though I recall that OCL tourneys had a much shorter grace period back when they were running. I can't see a particular need for the grace period to be as long as 30 minutes; the only rationale I can see is that this is the grace period used in OTB events. However, as I have pointed out in the previous paragraph, TL is not run the same way as OTB tourneys, so it seems illogical to follow their grace period rules.
That being said, I have no idea where the broader TL community stands on this issue. We certainly couldn't change this rule before T54 starts next Tuesday. However, if people do feel as strongly about this as RiceFarmer does, I can certainly envisage this being changed in the future.
posted at 2016-07-14 03:48 by ricefarmer
But I think something should be done about players abusing the 30 min grace period
posted at 2016-07-14 05:39 by pchesso
In Snailbucket it is 15 minutes. Most of those who show up late, do so in the first 15 minutes. Who isn't online by minute 15, will in all likelihood not either make it by minute 30, e. g. those who overslept or forgot the game.
Btw., unlike ten years ago, many people own smartphones now and may sometimes be able to post about their being late on the Game forum even before game start, so the opponent does not have to wait in vain (if he/she has email forwarding set).
In my opinion, there is less reason than ever to let people wait for 30 minutes.
posted at 2016-07-14 13:01 by joshuar
Almost always when opponents have shown up late, they have had good reason, and because I wanted to play the game anyway, we play without any kind of penalty.
Again, this is different for me since I usually play on my computer, and the internet has many things for me to read about in thirty minutes. Whereas those that play on smartphones or ipads and such are forced into a single window at a time, so I can imagine the nightmare for them just sitting there.
posted at 2016-07-14 14:15 by schachbjm
Nowadays, it is possible to inform sb. about the delay much more easily than a few years ago (smartphones,...). Personally, I always check the game forum 1 hour and a few minutes before the game starts. When there is a good reason for a no-show/delay, I am happy that there is an information and always offer to re-schedule/late-start the game.
There is no question that it is not possible to be always on time, due to work, traffic or internet problems.
Furthermore, there is the option to inform your opponent at an early stage that you might be a few minutes late. For instance, Nightfury informed me that he has to work up to xx:xx, so he might be 15 mins late. In such cases, I have no problems to wait for 30 mins or even 45 mins.
On the other hand, it is really annoying to keep a date, waiting for your opponent for more than half an hour without any information.
Best regards
schachbjm
posted at 2016-07-14 18:18 by KayVee
15 minutes should suffice for grace.
posted at 2016-07-14 18:54 by smallblackcat
As I said before, I don't think it's good practice to try to rush through a change before T64. The one concern I see with a change like this is that the old rule has been around for so long that many people may be taken by surprise if we change it, and the way to resolve that problem is by giving as much notice and information about the change before it happens.
Also, I want to consult with some of our veteran TDs and admins to see if there are any issues that I am missing. I don't doubt pchesso's recollection that this was considered and rejected in the past (although I personally don't remember it). Also, I note his excellent point that circumstances have changed too, making a longer grace period less helpful.
posted at 2017-06-22 00:58 by PankracyRozumek
posted at 2017-06-22 05:18 by kurumim
As pointed out above, deducting the time from the offender's clock is not a feasible solution, so how about punishing players arriving 15 minutes late to the game with -1 RR (reliability rating)? It's actually a simple adaptation of the existing rules, as a forfeit results in -2 RR (i.e., 15 minutes late would be 'half a forfeit', so to speak), and it may be enough to prevent abuse because no player can afford to lose a series of RR points. Just an intermediate idea.
Cheers,
Roberto.
posted at 2017-06-22 05:47 by kurumim
posted at 2017-06-22 09:19 by herrahuu
Lauri
posted at 2017-06-22 13:43 by schachbjm
I like your idea, however I have a few remarks
... as far as I know the RR-system is not active at the moment
... it is quite some work for the TDs to check whether a player was 15 mins late. There is not a TD online at all times and in my point of view, it cannot expected that a player reports his opponent for being 15 mins late.
You stated that a reduction of grace period could lead to players rushing to claim a win after just 15 mins, which is right indeed.
Firstly, I would argue that it is possible to inform your opponent that you are still at work/in the train/have connection issues with a brief post in the game forum (almost everybody has a smartphone nowadays) and be there in a couple of minutes.
Secondly, I doubt that many player would claim a forfeit after 15 mins. My personal experience is that the players compete in TL to have fun and play chess; and not to claim wins. Most players try to re-schedule the game even if it might be bad for the team.
I would welcome a reduction to 15-20 mins, but I would use the topic to reform the complete TL statutes. It is obvious that some of the are outdated (quad formations, playoff system, reliability rating, ...) and need to be updated to the status quo. There were at least two discussions (about an adjournment and a double red card for misconduct), which would have occured, when the rules are clear and up to date. It might be a good idea to form a group of TL staff, veterans and captains to review the statutes. A "big reform" would be best for us players in comparison to a step by step change, since information process is easier.
Best regards
schachbjm
posted at 2017-06-22 15:23 by joshuar
However, I personally don't look at it as "reporting" when a person doesn't show up by the grace period time limit, and I'll post in the game forum soon afterward that I can either play within "x" time or I plan to claim the forfeit. If they show up five minutes later, we'll play, but that message will be in the game forum, regardless, if they're that late.
All that said, I'm fine with 20 minutes, keeping as-is, or whatever.
posted at 2017-06-23 05:24 by kurumim
Well, even if there were a way to detect the 15-minute delay automatically (something like what we see on the Pending Games page, where games are highlighted in red after a delay of 30 minutes), I suppose the system wouldn’t identify which player was late (and we’re assuming he/she would arrive sometime between minutes 16 and 29). Joshua’s comment made me think that maybe the offended party could simply choose whether to report the 15-minute delay in the Game Forum or not.
bjm, you and I are here for the same reasons and I’m sure that, just like me, you try to show as much goodwill and flexibility as possible in scheduling and even rescheduling games, but are we on the majority side? From what I’ve seen so far I’d honestly say I have doubts and I do fear that reducing the grace period might lead to an increase in the number of forfeits, which of course wouldn’t do any good to the competition.
I hadn’t thought about a complete revision of the statutes, but it’d be interesting to know more about your ideas on those many topics. As we’re talking about abuse, it seems to me that negotiations are much more a source of it than the grace period, and I think contact deadlines could be shortened in 12 hours without any problem. But maybe I should suggest that in another thread.
Thanks for the replies, guys. The more feedback and discussion, the better.
Cheers,
Roberto.
posted at 2017-06-23 06:46 by schachbjm
I would not support a penalty system which is based on whether the opponent reports the 15 min delay, since it would not be equal/justice. The reliability rating should not be dependend from the behaviour of the opponent.
posted at 2017-06-23 07:18 by schachbjm
posted at 2017-06-23 07:22 by kurumim
I know you said RR is not currently in use, I'm just taking the existing rules as a basis for discussion.
posted at 2017-06-23 19:27 by smallblackcat
So it seems I basically promised to reduce the grace period last year, and then promptly forgot all about it! In my defence, there's really only a small window between tourneys in which such changes can be done, and to be honest I enjoy having a bit of a break from TL.
However, you've chosen the perfect time to restart discussion on this issue. I've had a brief conversation with jaberwock, and we feel we can enact this change ahead of T68. We're intending to open the tourney at the start of July, so I will include an announcement of the rule change at that point.
At this stage I think we'll do a homepage announcement, an amendment to the relevant statutes, plus a mention in TDs' start of tourney message. I'm open to any further suggestions on how to advertise the change.
posted at 2017-06-25 07:02 by herrahuu
I like that the fundamental rule is to have as much chess as possible and as much fun while playing as possible.
I also like that there are some boundaries that protect both players in case one feels the other made it impossible to enjoy the game.
So, if game could be played even the secodary rules got broken, there is no unjustice in my opinion as fundamental rule got followed. :)
posted at 2017-07-04 12:40 by tseltzer
So the RR system is not being utilized. What about Yellow/Red cards?
posted at 2017-07-05 02:08 by smallblackcat
posted at 2017-07-11 08:14 by smallblackcat
posted at 2017-07-11 12:56 by tseltzer