What your seeing is people who don't waste time playing 10,000 bullet games and never improving. Correspondence is not cheating, it is a different time control with different rules and should have a separate rating, but it does not. So why be suprised when your 1 second wood pushing moves get lower rating then someone who spends a week on one move. Wake up to your own ignorance.
@Z960
Hey chief; theirs no reason to be bringing that kinda attitude in here. Take it down a notch.
My Original Post was talking about the 0:1s and the correspondence guy...saying BOTH were weird. So not sure why your acting like I (or we) am crying BC of the correspondence guy beating out the 0+1s.
They are 24 Hour Games; not a week ; people are not saying this stuff due to the time he is able to spend on a given move.
Its the correspondence rules and everything around it that makes this a strange situation. Conditional premoves, allowed to copy perfect games (not engine use; but might as well be), etc.
Go read the TOS on correspondence and the Questions and Answers stuff.
Heres an example from there:
" 3. Is it cheating if I use an opening book for correspondence games?
A: You may use an *opening book* or *games database* for rated and unrated CORRESPONDENCE games. You can use a *book* and not an engine. "
There are many other gray areas around correspondence as well.
NTM the fact; the vast majority of this user and several others using this 'trick' are finishing each game within 24 hours. Sometimes much faster. One of these said users currently has 137 correspondence games open across all variants; 90% of which are against 1500? accounts. Heh.
But, doesn't appear they are breaking any rules; just found a glitch in the matrix and are neoing the heck out of it.
Hey chief; theirs no reason to be bringing that kinda attitude in here. Take it down a notch.
My Original Post was talking about the 0:1s and the correspondence guy...saying BOTH were weird. So not sure why your acting like I (or we) am crying BC of the correspondence guy beating out the 0+1s.
They are 24 Hour Games; not a week ; people are not saying this stuff due to the time he is able to spend on a given move.
Its the correspondence rules and everything around it that makes this a strange situation. Conditional premoves, allowed to copy perfect games (not engine use; but might as well be), etc.
Go read the TOS on correspondence and the Questions and Answers stuff.
Heres an example from there:
" 3. Is it cheating if I use an opening book for correspondence games?
A: You may use an *opening book* or *games database* for rated and unrated CORRESPONDENCE games. You can use a *book* and not an engine. "
There are many other gray areas around correspondence as well.
NTM the fact; the vast majority of this user and several others using this 'trick' are finishing each game within 24 hours. Sometimes much faster. One of these said users currently has 137 correspondence games open across all variants; 90% of which are against 1500? accounts. Heh.
But, doesn't appear they are breaking any rules; just found a glitch in the matrix and are neoing the heck out of it.
@DollaHollaAtcha , the problem with the correspondence guy is NOT that he is playing correspondence! It is that he ALWAYS plays against 1500? opponents.
Of course , a 1500? can be a GM that just joined Lichess. This is why he is playing correspondence , to avoid the loss of rating points.
And he is not doing this only in Racing Kings...
Of course , a 1500? can be a GM that just joined Lichess. This is why he is playing correspondence , to avoid the loss of rating points.
And he is not doing this only in Racing Kings...
Wow, I hadn't thought about using opening books for variant correspondence games! I wonder what RK books even exist..
Yea; so as far as I can tell; the conclusion is that correspondence shouldnt be rated for Variant games; unless you give it a separate rating category; or tally it in with the standard correspondence rating.
IMHO 0+1 or 1/4 games also should not be counted toward ratings for variants.
Purely Flag match winners have no business populating the top of the leaderboards...for almost all of the variants. (50% of most the top 10s; as high as 80% on a couple of variants; are purely 0+1 players. Nothing else.)
The way ping is able to be manipulated is one reason; but its out shadowed merely by the fact that one who is not actually good at a variant shouldnt be on a leaderboard. Time wins often does not equate to a player being good; especially when (as I mentioned above) one of the top players in one of the variants has won 90% of their 0+1 games via Time flags. 30-40% of those were within 2-3 moves...lol
IMHO 0+1 or 1/4 games also should not be counted toward ratings for variants.
Purely Flag match winners have no business populating the top of the leaderboards...for almost all of the variants. (50% of most the top 10s; as high as 80% on a couple of variants; are purely 0+1 players. Nothing else.)
The way ping is able to be manipulated is one reason; but its out shadowed merely by the fact that one who is not actually good at a variant shouldnt be on a leaderboard. Time wins often does not equate to a player being good; especially when (as I mentioned above) one of the top players in one of the variants has won 90% of their 0+1 games via Time flags. 30-40% of those were within 2-3 moves...lol
Yes.
#13
The man expressed the basic meaning of the discussion. What we saw in the games found by many people in general distorts the concept of correspondence.
ZH960 got into the conversation for a reason - he knows perfectly well that he is not engaged in the game.
#13
The man expressed the basic meaning of the discussion. What we saw in the games found by many people in general distorts the concept of correspondence.
ZH960 got into the conversation for a reason - he knows perfectly well that he is not engaged in the game.
The question is why correspondence is using the same rating as the variation.
nvm
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.