GameKnot: GameKnot related, manupilation of rating

GameKnot related: manupilation of rating

« Back to forum

From

Message

dirklanger
05-Sep-09, 04:50

manupilation of rating

It bothers me a lot that you will find prove of manupilation of ratings here on GK and those who act that way will come along fine with it.
The 5th of September 2009 "chrisobee" resigned 7 of his games in positions which still seemed very open. Did he do that to push his rating down or did he some favours to his opponents? The same thing with those players who time out a lot and systematically like for example "lucasvervoort", "harpov" and "zoltantor" to name only a few. Are those players also playing under other user names and help to build them up systematically playing against themselve and resign? Should we bann those players from this platform? It sure kills the moral of all the many players who play fair and give their best.

kingdawar
05-Sep-09, 05:11

Rating manipulation

"You may not artificially manipulate your rating. It includes, but not limited to, resigning multiple games with equal or winning positions, letting multiple games time out while still visiting GameKnot, intentionally losing games to lower your rating in general."

Just send feedback about it, do not discuss it in the forums

gameknot.com

untateve
05-Sep-09, 05:23

Most of us are here to play chess, improve our game, and have fun. There are those, however, who will manipulate their rating for any of a variety of reasons. Usually these individuals have self-esteem deficits and as such, MUST have a high rating or they simply do not feel good about themselves. To be honest, those individuals are more deserving of our sympathy than our wrath.

I disagree with dirk in that it kills morale of many other players who play fair. I think there is too much focus on the ratings. I know that I am working to improve my game and I know that I'm getting better. How another individual spends his/her time manipulating their rating has nothing to do with my game or my rating.

tactical_abyss
05-Sep-09, 05:44

Deleted by tactical_abyss on 11-Sep-09, 08:17.

myrydin
05-Sep-09, 06:12

I think it's poor form to name people and attach allegations that are backed up with nothing stronger than circumstantial evidence. As HK said, the correct way to proceed when you suspect that this sort of thing may be happening is to contact GK, outlining your reasons. There could be various innocuous explanations for why these things occur.

tugger
05-Sep-09, 06:26

Indeed, I agree with myrydin. It's ok to talk about rating manipulation, but it's not ok to accuse people directly without any real evidence.

Resigning multiple games that are not losing is suspicious, I will grant. However, there are legitimate reasons why someone might do this, for example, if someone feels they can no longer commit to their games, resigning is better than timing out. I have done this myself.

And multiple time outs, I'm sure we could all think of loads of reasons for this.

TA has a point. If people are that hung up about their rating that they must find ways to inflate it, that's not my problem, it's theirs. In fact, it's better for me if I play someone who has an inflated rating, if I win I get more points.

I suppose I could run into someone who has crashed their rating down to qualify for a lower quality GK tourney, and lose more points than I would have. But, I really don't care. I won't lose any sleep over my rating.

tugger
05-Sep-09, 06:31

"TA has a point."

Sorry, I meant untateve has a point.

easy19
05-Sep-09, 12:02

I do not know about the others..

But lucasvervoort had some real troubles at the home front. that was loud and clear on his profile..
And Harpov well he times out his games against me also. but he had a awesome game-load with loads of games demanding him to move soon.. I think he just chewed of more then he could handle in the time he is on-line and playing chess..

fmgaijin
05-Sep-09, 15:45

Deleted by fmgaijin on 05-Sep-09, 15:47.

fmgaijin
05-Sep-09, 15:46

All of the "Named" Players Have Posted Reasons

I am either very familiar or somewhat familiar with the players named above. Several of them have serious health issues for themselves (or, in one case, a spouse who is also a GK player) while the others have posted or informed their opponents that they had unspecified "personal problems" which were forcing them to either cut back on games (which cannot be "stopped" from coming if you are already in the middle of a GK or MT event) or leading them to timeout in games when their personal issues left no time to analyze and post moves.

To the best of my knowledge, none of those players plays under another identity, either, so they were not simply "moving" points to their alter egos. And all have had high ratings with these identities, so if they were doing that they would have been having their OTHER identities lose to these ones!

No, these are just unfortunate situations when real life has taken a priority over GK chess.

tag1153
05-Sep-09, 18:45

real life?

.......sounds interesting......maybe I'll try it;)

shema_yisrael
09-Sep-09, 13:27

Real life is just a crutch for people who can't handle chess.

More seriously, I've timed out 9.7% of my GK games, usually while experiencing an episode of
clinical depression. I've talked to other GK players who have had similar difficulties. I think
that people who police GK have too much time on their hands.

rt4sm
11-Sep-09, 05:24

It might not be manipulation.

i recently timed out in some games for the first time. The reason was simple; i foolishly took on a much higher gameload than usual and did not have the time to keep up with all the extra games. That was not rating manipulation; it was just because i simply had too many games. I learned my lesson and cut down the gameload back to a manageable figure. There are many other reasons why people may time out, it's not necessarily 'rating manipulation.'

tactical_abyss
11-Sep-09, 06:20

Deleted by tactical_abyss on 11-Sep-09, 08:16.

nathanman22
05-Nov-09, 17:16

This is a good place to post

Hi! My name is Nathan (nathanman22). I recently had computer issues--my internet majorly malfunctioned resulting in a huge number of time outs. My rank dropped from around 1400 to 790's. This is a classic example of a logical reason for a drop in rank. Now, I don't feel it is fair for me to join a minitournament, GK tournaments, a league, or a ladder. I feel that this gives me an unfair advantage in my games. I wish to raise my rating back up, but I'm having trouble finding people willing to play me now. Any ideas or know anyone who would be willing to play me despite my inaccurate rating. I'm about 1400-1500 most of the time. Let me know. Thanks.

Sincerely,
Nathanman22

nathanman22
05-Nov-09, 17:54

Decided on Ladder Play

I decided I would join the slow ladder and post it clearly on my profile what I am. Those who challenge me should be reading my profile before challenging anyway. That way, I have a chance of making some progress upward with people that are hopefully about my rank.

-Nathan

PS If you think for some reason I shouldn't join the ladder because of my unfair advantage please post it, I can withdraw from the ladder if needed.

ionadowman
05-Nov-09, 18:04

Interesting case...

... many correspondents have supposed that the ratings of the players in question have been manipulated upwards in some way.

But those mentioned by name have been very strong GK players, who, I imagine, would have strong incentives to wish their rating to remain somewhere in the stratisphere. I looked up the game record of one 'name', and, yes, he had a sting of 7 or so losses, all resigned, by the look of it, but all were against players of roughly equal to even higher ratings than himself. Further, the positions, though not lost exactly, didn't look too good (from what I saw), especially in games that were fairly advanced (there was one 11 or so mover that looked OK-ish).

Now, I am inclined to accept the observation of fmgaijin (insofar as I have much of an opinion - or an entitlement to an opinion - about this anyhow). I can well believe a misjudgment about one's ability to handle a large volume of games can leave one embarrassed for time. What do you do about it? Accept that you might well time out on some of them?

You might decide that rather than time out, you would still take the ratings hit for the losses, but instead resign some of the games with an explanation as to why. For one thing, this is a more controlled method of pulling back your game load to manageable proportions. It extends a courtesy to your opponents who will be the more inclined to accept your challenge another time.

If there is a form of 'ratings manipulation' involved, you might tend to resign games against stronger opponents, which would have the tendency to minimise the ratings damage.

But what would you have? Select games at random to abandon? Last in first out maybe? The thing is, players are more likely to keep the games going against lower rated opponents simply because thay can play them rather faster than they can versus their peers. Again, it's more a time management thing than a ratings manipulation. I'm fairly sure one would tend choose the most complex games, especially games in their early middlegame to abandon, as being those that will require the most time. The effect of this kind of management of course is to slow down the ratings drop. Imagine the howls from the sidelines if the players in question did leave it all to chance and their ratings started hurtling southwards all the faster!.

For mine, without really knowing what has been happening - because I have not been involved - I'm inclined to 'acquit' on the grounds, not so much owing to more than reasonable doubt, as the belief that what dirklanger has observed is susceptible to a more charitable interpretation.

Cheers,
Ion

« Back to forum

chess online