BrainKing - Discussion boards (BrainKing.com)

Subject: Re: Tournament Next Round

coan.net: Yes, you are right. Either solution would require programming and testing, which I currently don't have time for. Anyway, I don't think it's a critical issue when people can play unlimited number of tournaments.

13. November 2011, 01:05:42

coan.net

Subject: Tournament Next Round

Roberto Silva: I agree it would be nice if the site could determine a winner of a section even before all games are done. Another idea would be to make it a way for a few "tournament masters" or something - people who understand tournament scoring could "mark" winners of a section so the next round could start before all the games are complete.

It would be some more "manual" work, but honestly it would be what - one or two tournament a week at the most that would need winners marked so the next round could start. (I would volunteer for the job.)

Of course both solutions would include additional site programming, but would be a nice addition to the site.

12. November 2011, 19:56:43

Roberto Silva

Subject: Re: Slow players

Modified by Roberto Silva (12. November 2011, 19:57:12)

Thad: Indeed, it should be possible to start the next round once the section winners are mathematically decided, even if there are games left. I'm not sure how much of a trouble it would be to code that however...

12. November 2011, 13:03:22

Thad

Subject: Re: Slow players

Gabriel Almeida: In the tournament you site, the games that are unfinished *don't matter* for determining who will play in the next round, therefore it should be started already! Fencer, why do you allow this?

12. November 2011, 02:52:25

Mélusine

Subject: Re: Slow players

Gabriel Almeida: Your example is terrible !

If I was the last player to make my moves, sure, I would feel guilty.

11. November 2011, 23:35:35

Vikings

Subject: Re: How about a "New Rook" tournament

Aganju:

11. November 2011, 17:52:42

This board is turning into my favorite board to read.

I especially like one person's post here (who name I won't mention because of the potential harsh penalty)

I don't have any brains and with all the tourneys I play in, you'd think I'd have at least one (even the one in my head is questionable)

11. November 2011, 17:49:48

Subject: Slow players

Let me tell you an example of what has been said here. This tournament. A lot of "pawn players" are waiting that it ends. Almost 3 years to play a 7 points cube gammon in groups of 4 or 5 players? It's obviously too much. And I know that players who haven't ended their games are great people. I'll say no names, but one of them is a great friend, a "clean and fair player", and I really respect and like him very much. But those pawns can't play any other tournament since January'2009! Some of them may be expecting to win it and the prize associated, and... nothing more than wait. (Listen to Waits music, BTW... eheh). This is "legal", but it's not understandable, in my opinion!

11. November 2011, 17:35:44

Subject: Re: How about a "New Rook" tournament

Aganju: Oh, I can't remember now... I think it was with "normal colours", but I recommend you to no nominate ANY colour... :)

11. November 2011, 17:32:25

Subject: Re: How about a "New Rook" tournament

Gabriel Almeida: colors? You mean politically flavored colors like gas-chamber green, or blood red? Or just normal like purple or pink? Or racially incorrect, like black? Oops. I learned the politically correct term is now 'of color', like 'a man of color' or 'a hole of color' (formerly called a 'black hole')...

warning, the above statement might contain sarcastic or humorous references

11. November 2011, 17:21:07

Subject: Re: How about a "New Rook" tournament

Aganju: And it's not necessarly "person's names"... I've been almost shot, in BK, just by using "colours" names... eheheheh.

Martinez, you can buy me a membership... I'll never force you to say my name! :)

BTW, I never bought any brains either, and I still have a few. I think I won them in a free prize tourney...

11. November 2011, 14:15:22

Subject: Re: Do I get shot now?

Aganju: Yes, three times in the head! :)

11. November 2011, 14:09:54

Subject: Re: How about a "New Rook" tournament

Modified by Aganju (11. November 2011, 14:10:18)

Pedro Martínez: You can't mention names here?? Johnny, Jim, Jack! Do I get shot now? ;-)

11. November 2011, 14:08:32

I see. I'd count that as 'bought' in the wider meaning - you paid money, well knowing you get brains for it. - I endorse the idea, don't misunderstand me. Just wanted to hear potential alternatives.

11. November 2011, 14:02:11

Subject: Re: How about a "New Rook" tournament

Aganju: I checked my “Brains History” and it says I got my first 50 Brains for having purchased a Rook membership for a person whose name I cannot mention here because it is prohibited to mention names here under a harsh penalty.

11. November 2011, 13:31:45

Subject: Re: How about a "New Rook" tournament

Aganju: I must have won it somewhere…

11. November 2011, 13:27:28

Subject: Re: How about a "New Rook" tournament

Aganju: not counting the one in your head

11. November 2011, 13:26:32

Subject: Re: How about a "New Rook" tournament

Pedro Martínez: So how did you get your first brain?

11. November 2011, 13:16:19

Subject: Re: How about a "New Rook" tournament

Modified by Pedro Martínez (11. November 2011, 13:32:33)

Thom27: I have never bought myself a single Brain on this site – only bought them for others. Yet, you must understand that the Brains are used as an equivalent of money here, since we can purchase membership with them. That's why I don't think “20 free Brains for all” is such a good idea, at least not from the owner's point of view. However, making the users be able to purchase them, that's a whole different story.

11. November 2011, 12:52:57

Thom27

Subject: Re: How about a "New Rook" tournament

Pedro Martínez: This is also a way, of course. I personally would not like it to buy brains instead of earning them by playing games, because playing is what this is all about. But every player is free to try to avoid bying them, or at least buy as few as possible.

11. November 2011, 12:32:39

Subject: Re: How about a "New Rook" tournament

Thom27: Wouldn't it be easier just to enable Brains purchasing again?

11. November 2011, 12:12:41

Thom27

Subject: Re: How about a "New Rook" tournament

Gabriel Almeida: Yes! ATM it is difficult to get brains for a player who has 0 brains, like me. I participate in "pedros birthday tourney" and "not so random tournament", but to be realistic: it is unlikely that I will win any of them.

There might be a program like "20 free brains for all": one day soon all accounts are filled up to 20 brains, and newly created accounts from then on start with 20 brains.

Or: regularly (e.g. once a month) a free prize tournament starts automatically, where the first three players win some brains. It might be a random game tournament, so that there is a considerable luck factor in the choice of the game type against a specific opponent; there is always some game a particular player does not or barely know. And players having more than, say, 50 brains might be excluded from those tournaments, so that the "poor" players have better chances.

11. November 2011, 11:52:45

Subject: Re: How about a "New Rook" tournament

happyjuggler0: Hey, Fencer... we need more brains in the site! :)

11. November 2011, 01:32:06

happyjuggler0

Subject: How about a "New Rook" tournament

In the same spirit as the other recent posts, perhaps Fencer could sponsor a tournament (perhaps hosted by someone else if he gets a volunteer) that is only open to people who buy a new rook membership (no renewals). Fencer could donate a prize of some brand new brains perhaps as an incentive, or something else that catches his imagination.

11. November 2011, 01:23:03

Mélusine

Subject: Re:

Gabriel Almeida: Yes, I agree, it's a good spirit. But I think that some members with " little " subscriptions as a bishop for example are about in the same situation as a pawn (they often have difficulties to pay their membership) so, for me, we could offer something to these persons too.
I think that your idea should be developed.

10. November 2011, 20:44:28

SL-Mark: The pawn must be "indicated" for a fellowship. It could work with a Fencer's PM, something like "Fencer, I want to pay a 6 months knight membership to the pawn ####, and it must be noted for the fellowship MONKEYS SWINGING MADHOUSE", for example.

Monkey: Fencer would create that Team Tournament for invitation(!!!), according to the PM received.

Melusine: The job in the fellowship would be to get a "paid godfather" to the pawn they would promote. And receive him/her properly. When I came to Brainking, I knew nothing about the site, and some very pacient people in Tugas explained me everything. My point is to inforce that spirit! And, of course, it would create stronger union between the new paying member and the fellowship... seems a very healthy thing, to me! :)

By the way... I would certainly pay a membership to a pawn, in that spirit! :)

10. November 2011, 15:57:02

Mélusine

Subject: Re:

Gabriel Almeida: And, in the team, who will pay the subscription of the pawn ? The captain ? Or each member of the team will give a little money ?
I think that this offer (very nice for a pawn) can block people who have difficulties to pay their own subscription. As it's something about money, it can be discriminatory for people having little means (I think to a student or a unemployed person, for example).
Sorry to tell you this, because I see that your intentions are good.

10. November 2011, 15:00:54

MadMonkey

Subject: Re:

Gabriel Almeida: Secondly, we need Team Tournaments to enter

lol

10. November 2011, 14:38:35

SL-Mark

Subject: Re:

Gabriel Almeida: Firstly, the pawn must get into a Fellowship. How does that bit work?

10. November 2011, 12:53:53

Subject: Re:

Gabriel Almeida: Oh: the pawn promoted for the team must play in the team tournament, of course!

The point is to give a "good reception" to new-paying-members.

10. November 2011, 12:51:41

Subject: Re:

Fencer: Listen to my idea:

- A Team tournament (you choose game/games) where any team who wants to join in must promote a pawn to rook/knight/bishop for... 6 months, for example.

The prize for the winning team is a "credit" to promote another pawn, for 6 months.

Sounds good?

10. November 2011, 10:52:14

Subject: Re:

Gabriel Almeida: Well, I think we could make one more membership action with colour codes. Or something like that.

10. November 2011, 10:50:02

Subject: Re:

Hrqls: It definitly is! :)

Have you create any "special party" in BK for your bithday, Fencer? If you need any suggestion... eheheh

10. November 2011, 09:50:15

Hrqls

Subject: Re:

Fencer: still ??? congrats!! hold on to that 3! its the best ;)

9. November 2011, 21:05:12

Subject: Re:

Gabriel Almeida: Yes, it starts with a three.

9. November 2011, 17:59:45

Subject: Re:

Fencer: Almost 30 years old, I bet!

9. November 2011, 16:05:47

Subject: Re:

Fencer: Another birthday? You had one around this time last year too. hmmmmm, I sense a pattern evolving.

9. November 2011, 15:24:53

Subject: Re:

toedder: Thanks.

9. November 2011, 13:59:37

toedder

Happy Birthday, Fencer :)

7. November 2011, 20:49:01

Subject: Re: RE: Slow play

JerNYC: lol well said.

7. November 2011, 20:22:11

JerNYC

Subject: RE: Slow play

Yes, I've played some of the longest games ever on this site, but slow players are by no means endemic to Brainking. They are pretty much on every site. It does hold up tournaments for me on here but I can play plenty of tournaments on other sites with less restrictions. Besides, sometimes I can be slow too (from burnout or move contemplation) but I once start moving quickly again that's usually a bad sign for my opponent. Sometimes I would think if anyone ever asked me to move faster in those phases, I would say, "Why are you in such a rush to lose?" LOL So, being on both sides, I can understand all the frustration. It's best to stick to the time limits that work best for each individual person and to avoid those players that frequently move too slow or timeout.

7. November 2011, 06:45:40

Subject: Re: re number of games

rod03801: ahhhhh

7. November 2011, 06:41:38

rod03801

Subject: Re: re number of games

Artful Dodger: Fischer clock games

7. November 2011, 05:32:24

Subject: Re: re number of games

Aganju: Is it possible in such a tourney set up that one could accumlate 7 days and keep that number? I suppose they'd have to keep moving to keep it up and that would be the point. But I'm curious as to how the numbers would work exactly.

6. November 2011, 22:43:36

Subject: Re: re number of games

Artful Dodger: Here is an idea which might help: I set up tournaments typically with 2 days or so, but accumulating time up to 7 days. That means you need to make a move within two days in average, but if you play rather fast, you will accumulate 7 days of time, so if you have a business travel or such, you can let that run down.
The point is that you need to 'earn' that longer time by playing several moves faster than the limit of two days; you cannot use it for every move.
I think that should work ok, if everybody sets tourneys up that way. Maybe even 1 day per move, accumulating up to 7 days?

beach: I agree with what you wrote; these are games. However, some people are more competitive than others (and I'm in the first row here), and they can't help it when a player times out a lot of games. Not if he does against me - free BKR and wins - but if he does it in a difficult tournament: Imagine I squeeze a draw out of a strong player after a difficult game, which I'm proud of, and then he looses all other games on time. So the 'punishment' for me moving fast and playing well is that I get a draw, and all others get a 'win', so I'm one point behind in the competition. That has happened, and it does not go well with my mood... being less competitive would certainly ease the pain, but that's easier said than done - I am what I am.

6. November 2011, 22:22:03

Subject: Re: re number of games

beach: Many people can handle many games. I am playing a few people who have more games than you and they do fine. But regardless, some tourneys have lasted years and it's usually one or two people who drag them out that long. That's just plain bad form on their part. Yes it's within the time limit, but I've always looked at the 7 days as useful for those that would be gone a few days etc. Not to be used as a literal 7 days per moves. But I get what you are saying and that's why I now try to pay attention to tourneys and only play in 3 days per move tourneys.

Also, when a tourney organizer knows who the slow pokes are (those that move at the last minute) then like me, they likely would remove those players from their tourneys.

6. November 2011, 22:11:20

Roberto Silva

Subject: Re: re number of games

beach: Well said. I know it may be hard for some of the "10000 moves in a day" record-holders in here to believe, but some people actually do have a life outside online gaming, anc cannot afford to spend more than 10 minutes in a row at this site. The reason people pick longer time per move games is precisely so they can use that time - otherwise they'd join faster-paced games instead!

I realise this must be frustrating for pawns and knights who have a game limit, but for rooks? If that extra game in your list bothers you that much, it's time to recheck your priorities. Sorry if I sound rude, but if people are expecting "30 seconds per move" games, maybe they're in the wrong website.

6. November 2011, 20:47:11

beach

Subject: re number of games

I am a person who plays many games on this site, I prefer this site to other sites because as a rook I can play as many games as I choose with the time limits I choose, I pay for that prevlidge. I prefer faster time limits so I now do not enter any tournaments over 3 day limits. I think as a rook, we are entitled to play as many games as we choose. There a few people who get carried away, but from experience I find they tend to disappear fairly quickly. Personally I could careless if they time out, as for tournaments taking forever. I have one ludo tourament that is still going on and its 7 year old, should I tell the other player to hurry up and move faster, I think not. I think it would be nice if people could just remember its only a game site. If tournaments taking too long are the only problem you have in life you a lucky. I come to play and have fun, and frankly I think its quite rude of anyone to complain about how slow or fast anyone plays if they play within the time limit. I don't usually post much on any board, but I think you people complaining about other people's method of play should just give it a rest. Sorry if I offended anyone.

6. November 2011, 05:35:13

Marshmud

Subject: Re: Slow players

Mélusine: Yes Art is correct , how can anyone get upset with you. lol. You should be a professional arbitrator.

I would never ask you or any BB to change anything due to a slow player and have you decide such a matter. But on the other hand if asked, as I have in the past I just tell them so. In your fellowship I play games but limit myself on who I play. There is many ways on bk to stay away from players you choose not to play.

I won't put anyone in such a dilemma and you know well I respect you more then ANYONE on this site. You announced you point of veiw in a general form, speaking of the thousands of members who play. I agree with you and I know the person you are and you always give everyone the benefit of doubt. I was'nt speaking in a general term. I don't believe in game limits, however if a player over time proves he/she can't handle them all I do believe a limit should be placed. I have several good friends who play thousands of games and never a timeout.

Even with 3 day limits and the reset of vacation days at the 1st of year takes a simple 3 day tourny 2 years to complete....for some.

We speak of trying to get pawns to join, and some even say they play their pawns first so they can play quicky, enjoy more games and become members. I also believe this ....and the bishops and knights who can only play one tourny of each game....so I wonder how they all feel having to play 1 tourny for a year because someone holds the tourny up....

6. November 2011, 04:00:05