@Funkmaus I honestly don't think that the people in this forum are "public shaming" other players. Those who have the nerve to sandbag already proves that they don't deserve any respect.
Calling people names (Eg Sandbagging) can technically be illegal (At least in US Law) in the real world it can fall under Disorderly Conduct, Defamation of character, or Slander.
Since the account has not yet been show by the mods (Ie the government in our case) technically you can not say they are cheating.
However if Lichess actually followed real world laws (IE had a free speech clause) you could say "This person is allegedly a sandbagger (Assuming someone had filed a report on them already) and that would be fine. But Lichess will still and can still ban you (I would link to some accounts who have been banned for this but then I would get banned) for calling out people how haven't been ban hammered.
PS I am aware that Lichess follows all French law including free speech however they themselves do not have that clause go read the TOS.
Since the account has not yet been show by the mods (Ie the government in our case) technically you can not say they are cheating.
However if Lichess actually followed real world laws (IE had a free speech clause) you could say "This person is allegedly a sandbagger (Assuming someone had filed a report on them already) and that would be fine. But Lichess will still and can still ban you (I would link to some accounts who have been banned for this but then I would get banned) for calling out people how haven't been ban hammered.
PS I am aware that Lichess follows all French law including free speech however they themselves do not have that clause go read the TOS.
Why does the thread author even think that there are plenty of sandbaggers in bullet/ultrabullet?
Maybe there's just many people who are good players but struggle with the extremely fast time control (due to not owning the best of a mouse or something?) It's not that odd to have 1900 in Rapid and only 1300 in Bullet? (like, Bullet is so mind-dizzying, I'm not doing it myself. Even 3+0 is too dizzy for me).
Maybe there's just many people who are good players but struggle with the extremely fast time control (due to not owning the best of a mouse or something?) It's not that odd to have 1900 in Rapid and only 1300 in Bullet? (like, Bullet is so mind-dizzying, I'm not doing it myself. Even 3+0 is too dizzy for me).
If there's anything to be gained by any behavior, there are people engaging in that behavior. So yeah, there are sandbaggers. There are spikes that have other causes tho, so it's best not to assume. And since you can't prove anything-or do anything about it if you could-it's best not to think about it.
Remember the purpose of chess is enjoyment and bettering yourself. Anything outside of that is likely extraneous.
Remember the purpose of chess is enjoyment and bettering yourself. Anything outside of that is likely extraneous.
There are sandbaggers for sure, what I get from the OP is just that Bullet tournaments were flooded with them, then again I don't play bullet so I can't judge by own experience.
Do a feature request to permit only players that have a constant logically rating that would fit the tournament.
Example if I have a bullet rating of 1600, then I can only join ultrabullets that are similar in rating.
A plus and minus factor needs to be included to join the tournament.
It's obvious that are rating is going to increase when you take the time to think of the best move. Even an engine makes a better move if given time. So a rating increases as time increases or decreases as less time is given to complete a game.
A master in utlrabullet should basically be a master in slower game controls too. If they are 800 in classical and 2200 in ultrabullet, then there is something odd about their skill level.
The other ratings in other time controls should be considered in every tournament entry.
This method of entry would hone our chess ethics.
If you use assistance in your training, your training rating will prevent you from entering particular tournaments that use this suggested method of entering a tournament. A chess players background experience will permit them to join a tournament. Tournaments for all types of players. Not just open tournaments. Closed tournaments can be very good for online chess players. There are already some for masters only.
I know the feature request does not go in this forum post, but here it is ... some one else can but it else where.
--------------------------
FEATURE REQUEST: Create tournaments for players that have a particular Rating Deviation.
If you maintain a low deviation you can join a low deviation tournament, if you don't, you cannot join that tournament. If you have a provisional rating you can only join provisional players only tournaments.
-------------------------
Example if I have a bullet rating of 1600, then I can only join ultrabullets that are similar in rating.
A plus and minus factor needs to be included to join the tournament.
It's obvious that are rating is going to increase when you take the time to think of the best move. Even an engine makes a better move if given time. So a rating increases as time increases or decreases as less time is given to complete a game.
A master in utlrabullet should basically be a master in slower game controls too. If they are 800 in classical and 2200 in ultrabullet, then there is something odd about their skill level.
The other ratings in other time controls should be considered in every tournament entry.
This method of entry would hone our chess ethics.
If you use assistance in your training, your training rating will prevent you from entering particular tournaments that use this suggested method of entering a tournament. A chess players background experience will permit them to join a tournament. Tournaments for all types of players. Not just open tournaments. Closed tournaments can be very good for online chess players. There are already some for masters only.
I know the feature request does not go in this forum post, but here it is ... some one else can but it else where.
--------------------------
FEATURE REQUEST: Create tournaments for players that have a particular Rating Deviation.
If you maintain a low deviation you can join a low deviation tournament, if you don't, you cannot join that tournament. If you have a provisional rating you can only join provisional players only tournaments.
-------------------------
#93 @Cedur216 The author does not think that at all, you have misunderstood the point. Sandbaggers have massive rating fluctuations in ONE TIME CONTROL we all understand some people can play way worse in bullet than rapid. What we consider sandbagging is this @gabriella2002 just massive INTENTIONAL loses in one time control
#94 @Thaxiss That is a terrible idea. Imagine if we said that about sports. "There are tons of athletes doping on illegal drugs since you can't see them doing it it's best if you just ignore it" If we said it about the government "There might be tons of bribery in the government but since they are only allegations and no one has proved it yet it's best to ignore it."
#95 @Cedur216 Go check out this lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/sandbagging-11 they said the same thing that it doesn't happen much and within 2 hours I had found 6 sandbaggers in 8 UXXXX tournaments placed within the top 10. IDK about you but to me that seems like alot.
#96 @Toscani That would be a neat idea however it wouldn't actually stop players from sandbagging. It could prevent just as many players who are legitimate from joining these as it would to prevent potential cheaters. Players would still intentionally lose games to lower their rating just to join these tournaments.
#94 @Thaxiss That is a terrible idea. Imagine if we said that about sports. "There are tons of athletes doping on illegal drugs since you can't see them doing it it's best if you just ignore it" If we said it about the government "There might be tons of bribery in the government but since they are only allegations and no one has proved it yet it's best to ignore it."
#95 @Cedur216 Go check out this lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/sandbagging-11 they said the same thing that it doesn't happen much and within 2 hours I had found 6 sandbaggers in 8 UXXXX tournaments placed within the top 10. IDK about you but to me that seems like alot.
#96 @Toscani That would be a neat idea however it wouldn't actually stop players from sandbagging. It could prevent just as many players who are legitimate from joining these as it would to prevent potential cheaters. Players would still intentionally lose games to lower their rating just to join these tournaments.
@Lidraughtsorg My point was that as a player you shouldn't give it much thought. There's an organization to look out for the cheaters. Assuming every one who beats you is cheating, or that any spike is sandbagging is just going to wreck you.
I have received various warnings, but I have not offended anyone. lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/sandbagging-spike-on-lichess-?page=9#84 I just wrote that @JumanJJi he is a good player. Yesterday he lost 493 bullet points, today he gained 410. Just look at the games he plays. a real GM
Sandbagging doesn't occur but very often are players that think it's unfair when they lose fairly and just look for the excuse.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.