Erinity: Before jumping on me you should read my entire post. I did use the word IF. I say this to Watford as well. IF people are here every hour, every minute of the day they need a life. Again I stress the word IF. I know that most people are not in that category. However there are a select few that are, I am sure. My point ultimately comes down to that the odds of someone who doesnt have the time to play as much per day here has no chance to win a prize under the current action points system as there are going to be those who have all the time in the world to sit here play hundreds IF not thousands of games at a time each day to win the top prizes. I think personally there is something wrong with that kind of system Fencer has set up. Maybe a solution is to offer prizes for top players in various number of games ranges.

Example would be to divide people into categories based on average number of games played at a time.
50-100 games
100-200 games
200-300 games
etc etc etc.

This way people who play over a thousand games at a time dont drown out players who play much fewer games.

Brian1971: i agree with you about the jumping .. i would not have felt offended by your post .. even if i would be online 24/7 .. it would not mean that i have no life .. but i wouldnt mind if someone else thought me to have no life .. it would just mean that i would have different priorities and made that choice myself

but lets not get off topic :)

in all kinds of sports there is the system that who practices most has the biggest chance to win .. thats why in match of professionals against amateurs the professional will win most of the time .. professionals means 'people who can spend all their time to the task and are getting paid for it so that wont have to spend time on making money otherwise'

the same applies to this system of action points i think .... i will never make a chance winning those prizes .. but i dont think that kind of prize is mine anyway

i would love prizes for any of the upper ratings/statistics/.. though ;) nice idea!

Hrqls: I like the idea of prizes for top players in various game types. I guess my whole thing is if you are going to have prize competitions it should be fair for everyone to win a prize. The players that play constantly through the day should not have an advantage over those who cant play as much each day. I would even go as far as paying members and pawns having different competitions so they are not lumped together. Pawns cant carry as many games and wont be able to compete with most paying members. Pawns should not be left out of any prize competition either.

Brian1971: I guess the main issue then is what the definition of "fair" is. If you want completely fair for everyone, then Fencer should just draw 10 names out of a hat each month and award some prize.

jurek:Ahhh, interesting idea.  Maybe Fencer should really give it some thought

jurek: Maybe if we got our virtual name in the hat for every won game or every hour that we make a move or some other category, and then at the end of the month have names drawn for memberships etc?


HRQLS... Having prizes for ratings etc would have its own pitfalls, IE it would promote more cheating, as it is not really possible to audit whether someone is using a program for example.

Brian1971: The players that play constantly through the day should not have an advantage over those who cant play as much each day.

Are you kidding?

I would even go as far as paying members and pawns having different competitions.

So it seems that the BK July action fits your expectations perfectly.

Brian1971: "This way people who play over a thousand games at a time dont drown out players who play much fewer games."

This is another point that you haven't understood. Look at the Pawns competition and be aware that almost 100% of thoise points are single points for non-tournament games. In the Rooks competition something like 80-90% are tournament points which score double. So multiply the Pawn scores by 2 and compare the lists.

And then try and explain how Pawns with 20 games maximum are far, far from being "drowned out" by Rooks having over 1000 games??

You'll notice that there are no Knights in the entire Rooks competition. Oops, I shouldn't have said Rooks there, because it's for non-Pawns. Why no Knights? Because they don't have the 100s of games and they don't get many doubled points from tournament games, Knights are severely limited (crippled, in terms of the competition) in the number of these that they can have.

But that's not quite true. A Knight with a fast connection and the willingness to compete (ie, put in the time) could, with the techniques that the Pawns use, beat the Rooks and win a prize.

And that would apply to anyone in these ranges of number of games that you've proposed. It's not only numbers of simultaneous games, it's turnover.

Hrqls: Here's an idea to reward the top players. Have a brain system for winning tournaments. Maybe 20 brains for winning a tournament with 5 or fewer players and 50 for one with 6-10. And you could keep increasing it. And then have a set limit on number of tournaments that could count for this per month.

gambler104:
Before this happens, tournaments need to be fixed. The current system isnt really practical.
Tournys need to be round robin style till the end.  Having 3 or 4 winners for a tourney IS NOT a tourney  LOL
Should only be 1 winner per tourney..

Baked Alaskan: I agree with you completely.

gambler104: i would like that .... but hey i am dutch :)
there are already such tournaments ... you have to enter some brains and will earn more when you win :)

Hrqls: true, but many people don't have brains to begin with. July Action will give it to ten people so it is a start. I wish we had a promo period, a month even, where we gave out brains for winning tournaments or something entirely different. I think if we created a system to let everyone earn or attempt to earn brains, the brain tournaments would really start working. I think it was a great idea for Fencer to implement brain tournaments (as evidenced by my name), but so few people have brains that it doesn't seem to be working now.

gambler104:
....I had a brain once, but I gave it up for adoption...
seriously though...
I'd enter into a tourney, such as mentioned...

gambler104: u r a gambler!

gambler104: *nod* i dont have any brains either .. if i did i would enter those tournaments though :)

Brian1971: You're just the lastest in a series of people who come with an opinion on a topic that you haven't understood.

Have a read of a post I made to those other people. Competition resources and fairness/unfairness

And in fact I left out two resources from that list that give a clear advantage. For pawns it is free games slots with which to play a fast opponent. Pawns with only 4 or 5 are at a disadvantage. Of course they can resign some games and free up slots if they want to increase their competitiveness.

Another resource, one which has proved decisive, is connection speed. Someone on dialup has absolutely no chance against broadband users and the faster the broadband the better - provided you have sufficient speed in your opponents so that you're not staring at your game sheet most of the time.

there's another resource, lol, that it also "unfair" and that's the availability of BrainKing! Competitors who are in bed (or elsewhere) while Brainking is being down and being fixed will have an advantage over those who are ready and waiting to play clicky-clicky but can't log in.

Brian1971: "Before jumping on me you should read my entire post. IF people are here every hour, every minute of the day they need a life."

That is not a conditional statement and the IF, even in capitals, doesn't change it from a judgemental declaration.

"People who are here every hour, every minute of the day, need a life."

It's insulting and well worth jumping on you for.

Not only is it insulting but it's also naive. Have you ever seen a dance marathon? People who dance for hours until the last one's dropped? They have chosen to be in a competition that can be won only by constant, relentless attendance and attention, plus amazing endurance. They have a life and the've chosen to spend part of it in the competition.

Similarly this is a competition situation here. And while relentless attendance is not compulsory, nor an absolute neccesity, it does convey an advantage. That people have chosen to spend this part of their life engaged in such a pursuit of glory is not an indication that they have no life but that they are fitting this competition into their life. Your insults show lack of appreciation both socially and intellectually.

playBunny: Wow - somebody should check their blood pressure...And to those of you who actually manage to have the time to play continuously 24/7 for "Action Points" - what's the secret to finding that kind of time, I wanna play too

srnity: Lolol. Shhhh, I'm putting on my "stern face". ;-)

playBunny: I always think I'm looking at your stern when I see your face ;-)

alanback: :) I'm still chucklin'

alanback: LOL! ;-P