they worked perfectly for me

Czuch:  I have to confess I know nothing about ponds or how the BKR system works there.  I know that in backgammon large ratings swings are possible, though 500 points would be extreme.

alanback: yeah, it doesnt really matter much anyway, except maybe you can tell me how, when I time out in a pond in the first round, and then a year later I have my rating calculated and I go from 2400 to 1900, that really is a measure of my ability?

Obviously if you want to measure my true ability in pond games, then I am a lot closer to 2400 than to 1900....

Dont misunderstand me, I fully realize that I messed up in a big pond, and my rating will reflect that, but why does it have to wait until the whole pond is finished? I should have gotten that 1900 rating a year ago and moved on from it, instead, I spend a year building my BKR in other smaller games, only for waste. It just doesnt make any sense to me

Czuch:  I think you have overlooked the fact that the purpose of the ratings system is to measure your ability, not to allow you to manage your rating.

AbigailII: Wouldn't 1800 make more sense than using 2200 in this particular case?


Not really, since the only way someone would have such a bkr drop is if they had timed out on a bunch of games or something strange like that. I would think it would be more fair to take their "true" ranking, not the one they got from a bunch of timer outs?


Anyway, any comments on doing a pond bkr straight away after a person has actually fallen and therefore technically already lost the game? Why wait for the whole pond to finish, especially like the one I mentioned, where I could have finished another 50 or 100 ponds since I fell in that one and the time it actually finished?

"Splash, you fell in the pond. Old BKR 2315 new BKR 2245."

Instead of... ""your pond is finished 1 year after you fell, your BKR when you splashed was 2315, your BKR now is 2600, your new BKR 1950"!

Czuch: Why would using the BKR at game start make more sense than the BKR at game end? As for a counter example, take a game with a 30 day move limit. At the start, my opponent has a rating of 2200. 4 weeks later, when he makes his first move, his rating has dropped to 1800. After his first move, the game is finished in a few hours. Wouldn't 1800 make more sense than using 2200 in this particular case?

The problem is that whatever BKR you use, there will always be an example that can be constructed that shows the choice was bad. Ratings will chance over time, and games here take a long time. There's no way around it. The only answer is to not take ratings too seriously.

scottsan: click on the link to one of your started games on your main page.

alanback: Well, using the example of a tournament, if I want to play in a tournament with all people who have a similar BKR as myself, maybe because the game has a high luck value, so I make it for only people with a BKR over 2200, then the game goes on for a year and some guy beats me but they now have a 1800 BKR, does that make sense to use their 1800 BKR instead of the one we both started with?


Okay, how about with ponds then? I sign up for a large pond with 200 people and my BKR is 1900. My computer goes down and I miss the first round and come in last place. In the mean time my BKR rises to 2400 by the time this other game finally ends, and then I am killed because now I have lost to everyone else, most of whom have a lower BKR now than mine!

Shouldnt at least in ponds the rating be calculated at the time you actually lose, rather than when the thing finally ends?

after i log in how do I get to the game board for my next move?

alanback: Yes, for the reasons you said it is better to use the rating at the end of the match, as it is done.

But I don't understand your last remark about backgammon ratings. Since they don't work properly, backgammon tournaments with a BKR limit are skewed anyway, so the eligibility problem sort of vanishes. It remains a problem when the BKR is reliable though.

coan.net: Your example of a player timing out in all games looks unfair at first glance, but in fact it would be even more unfair if the ratings were taken at the beginning of the game. The rating points won by those timeouts are undeserved anyway, so the fewest points won the better.

Czuch:  Theoretically the players' ratings at the end of a match should be more indicative of their "true" ability than their ratings at the beginning, since being later in time they should reflect a larger statistical sample (i.e. more games played).  Remember your own rating will also change during the term of a match.  This is just a feature of a turn based site you can't do anything about.

One thing I have noticed that might be fixed is in setting the BKR range for a tournament.  Eligibility is based on a player's rating at the time he or she joins the tournament.  At the time the tournament starts, his or her rating may be significantly lower than the eligibility threshold.   This  diminishes the utility of being able to set a minimum BKR for entry.  This would not be particularly important if the BKR system for backgammon worked properly, but it does not so this is a major problem.
 

Snoopy: Try it now.

Snoopy: could you possibly be getting a small message saying "file is too long"

Snoopy: Have you tried typing "Ctrl +F5", that will do a hard refresh.

Snoopy: Profile icons still must be approved.

coan.net: Okay, thanks, I can see it both ways now, i guess....


I think it doesnt make sense in many ways because so many games last too long on a turn based site. It just doesnt make any sense in a game that can last over a year to base the new BKR on where we are at the end of the game instead of the beginning, does it?

Czuch: It is calculated at what the BKR's are at the end of the game.

I never liked this since if someone starts to time out on a lot of games, the first people who they start to time out with will get better BKR results... while those who time out in the later games once their opponent BKR is like 500 will get less.

But I understand why it is like this - since in most cases (not tons of time outs - but normal game playing), a persons BKR at the end of the game will more likely reflect their true rating. For example in the Knight Fight game, I started out really good with over 2000+ BKR after my first 4-15 games or so. But now my BKR is more reflective of my true talent in the game (1600 or something) so it makes more since to use the current rating to calculate the BKR change then my inflated 2000+ that I had by getting a lot of good early wins.)

I need some help please...

I thought BKR was calculated on what our BKR was when a game starts with someone, but it seems like it is actually calculated based on what our BKR is when the game actually finishes????

It doesnt make sense, since we are told during our in game play what the expected BKR change will be if we win or lose or tie, so why is it actually calculated based on when the game finally ends?

So, for example, if I want to play only people with a similar BKR to myself, but the game lasts for a year, i might end up playing against someone who is either far superior or far inferior to me, and my rating will reflect that?????

Fencer:  Thanks!  I see it's been done while I was sleeping ...

alanback: Not yet. But I want to add this feature (and a few more) during the weekend.

    Is there a page which lists all public albums?  When I click on the menu link I get a page that shows my albums and the newest public albums.  I can't find a page which shows less recent ones.

LSA: Gif, jpg, png.

I need some help with the pictures please?

What format is supported?

Because i have tried several and keep getting 'this file is not supported'

Just in case you were wondering brainbook.com is already taken but brainfacebook.com and facebrainbook.com are still available.

Artful Dodger: I was able to see your piccies.. so I guess that it is working.

Fencer:  Thanks.  I'm told the link is working fine for people so that's good.  I like the addition.  Thanks for the info.  I'm getting it now.  :) 

Artful Dodger: Until the system is improved.

Andersp: All friends.

Fencer:  Does "Friends only" include all friends or public friends only?

Artful Dodger: What do you mean "those people cannot see me"? Your album is accessible to them if you give them its URL.

I've set my photos for "selected" people and those people can't see me.  :0  I'll bet I missed something  :)

coan.net: 1) Not yet. But if you go to the user's profile and click the last album, you'd get a page with the particular user's public albums (more precisely, albums you are allowed to see).

2) That will be done.

3) A notification will show up at your Main Page. At the same place where the wall notifications are.

4) I was already thinking about fellowships walls, so this idea falls to the same category.

Just some quick answers.

1. Is there a place to see someone's public photo albums?

on the Photo albums link, it just shows the last 10 public albums.
on a persons profile, it just shows the last album.

It would be nice to have a link that shows ALL public albums in 1 place - so if someone is boards, they can go and view a lot of pictures without having to go to each profile and such.

2. Is there a way to know if there are comments for certain pictures. It would be nice to have a little (1) next to the preview of a photo if there is 1 comment (or 2, 3, ... etc...) That is it would be nice to know a photo has a comment without having to blow the picture up to full size. (since many of the photo's I can see OK with the small version, but if there is a comment - I might be more interested in seeing what others have said about certain photo's)

3. How about a way to know if someone comments on your photo. Of course if #2 is done, I can just look over my albums quickly to see which ones have comments - but maybe some sort of note like when someone writes on your wall.

4. Plus something I probable won't use, but others might - how about a fellowship photo album. An album that is open to any fellowship member to add photo's to. They BIG BOSS can delete any of them - and the person that uploaded a photo can delete their own.

Just some quick ideas and questions.

Servant: thanks for your interest in Cheversi ...
- how would you count fields attacked by pawns ?
in 2 directions or 4 ?
- can they or must (pawns) touch each other ?
- are they placed first or mixed and in any order with the remaining figures ?
***
I think it can be very intersting game ....
Andy.

Here are the details:
The gameboard has 10 x 10 squares
16 pieces of the normal chess game are used
by both sides
the four centre squares are blocked so no pieces
can go there
all other rules are the same as Cheversi

Snoopy: They should - otherwise you could ignore the whole stairs and be immune to challenges...

Jim Dandy: hahahaha........."buds on castle peaks"......flowers for "my princess" more likely...

and yeppers."if it ain't broke, don't fix it"

Czuch: I figured something was up the moment the buds appeared on the castle peaks

I guess it's like the old saying "once we stop moving forward,we begin moving backwards" positve change is good,but that reminds me of another old saying "if it ain't broke,don't fix it"

Jim Dandy: Im thinking I am glad I did not buy a lifetime membership, unless it would carry over to any "new" site, and as long as i live for another 60 years too!

But seriously, i think it can only be a good thing for fencer to expand the scope of this site, and i welcome it, I just want a piece of the IPO, thats all!

Czuch: Are you thinking what I'm thinking

Bernice: Its hard to miss

Czuch: you noticed also huh?

Not a personal complaint, as I dont mind at all, and I like the recent updates on this site, but it seems like a lot of "non game playing" stuff for a "game playing" site?

Just so long as I get in on the IPO.... yet it seems to me this place is gearing up for something much bigger than just a turn based game playing site?

pauloaguia: Thanks....ours hasnt been adjusted yet...Qld doesnt have daylight saving but the rest of the country does and it hasnt been altered yet.

Bernice: Daylight saving time started in Europe, where the BrainKing server is located... so the server time has been adjusted.

Bernice: Really, our went forward an hour at the weekend

 FrancescoLR:

why did my time change over night. Our daylight savings hasnt changed?

Ive had to align my time to Japan, Osaka etc instead of Brisbane.......