grenv: What I do not understand is that I thought a game had to be at least 4 moves to count toward a rating.

grenv: Lol. Silly me. I went straight to the games and didn't even notice tha last moves column in the games list.

Privacy allows people to hide their tactics. Hardly a major priority for most people but perhaps relevant in Battleboats if you don't want your search plans revealed. Maybe that's the case in other games but in most games it makes nary a hoot.

I find it annoying that my opponent can make a game private and I won't know until I try an access it without having logged on first (which I do sometimes).

BeeBeeDubbayoo: Where does it say that? Could it mean the 2 each that is also the limit for deletion?

BIG BAD WOLF:I am sure Fencer told me it was 2 moves

BIG BAD WOLF: http://brainking.com/en/FAQ?ht=7

what about this player
he is ranked #1 in the ratio statistics page but his last 10 games all finished in a timeout (in his favor :))
his checkers rating seems to be ok though as he played a lot of games in there :)

Hrqls: All his Battleboats, Dark Battleboats, Linetris and Checkers games have been won on an 11 or 13 hours-per-move clock. Many of his recent (since October) Anti-checkers have been won that way too. A huge number of his Line4 wins have been on time. This goes back to last year as well. He used the 1-day clock until Fencer introduced the Fischer's clocks. A complete bas-, er, unfair player, if you ask me, though it's not against the rules to use those clocks. Completely meaningless stats, though. He makes a mockery of everyone including Fencer.

playBunny: Can't the fischer clock work against him as well?

Groucho: Sure, but if you're using it in as deliberate a manner as he seems to be doing then he will be checking in frequently to ensure that he always gets to make his move. He's relying on his opponents not being as on the bal about it as he is. In the relatively few matches that that's been the case, he's had an honest game on his hands.

It's the overwhelming number of matches that he's won by timeout that makes it looklike cheating. Any normal person would feel wrong winning so much that way and would stop using such a clock because it's so obviously unfair to others. Such wins are hollow victories to real people. You don't even need to check individual games as I did. Simply look at the finished games lists and see how many games are done with in a sprinkling of moves.
Battleboats
Checkers
Anti-Checkers

playBunny: *nod* the number of moves made me puzzle as well.

11 hours is nasty .. it seems a lot but its less than half a day so most of it can be used while you are asleep

Hrqls: Yep. Most players don't make their last move, go to bed, get up and log in again... so they get sucker-punched.

playBunny: True. Is there any reason for allowing such time controls in the first place? Maybe a limit is needed on how short a game can be offered?

Groucho: some players like to play fast ... there are quite some 1 hour tournaments which are popular among some people ... its almost like playing realtime :)

Hrqls: those games would have to be prearranged then I suppose.

I guess there's always someone trying to look for a way to take advantage of the system

Groucho: It's a tough question. The purpose of the clock is to encourage fast play. A game with a hour total and no bonus is going to be over in two hours maximum. But I've had games that have been quicker yet had 1 day clocks. That was against opponents who had my speed style, were online at the same time and didn't have hundreds of games to play.

Strangely enough the Very Fast Fischer's Stairs that I play has been slower moving than the ordinary Stairs!

somehow i like to grab the 18 spot from my opponent (which he can secure when he rolls 6+1) .. i wonder if this is good practice though ?

Hrqls: Sure. The 5-point (5 and 20) and barpoint (7 and 18) are the best advanced anchors to have.

playBunny: ok :)

hmm .. i mean the 7 point which is closest to my opponents base ... so i move my backmen there .. are you talking about that as well ?

i mainly do it because i would have my opponent to have a 3 wide block when he rolls 6+1

playBunny: the truth is though, everyone that gets suckered by that player have accepted the time control, there is no help for ignorance.(the player shall remain nameless but we've all seen the name many times). I offered that player a game of Dark Battleboats on a 7-day limit and he vehemently declined without much explanation (of course it can be guessed).

ColonelCrockett: hear hear, stop accepting games that you can't finish, people!

grenv: it is a shame that so many can get suckered by this person. A game should be won by skill, not by insomnia (he can't be sleeping much).

ColonelCrockett: Who is this person gissa clue

wellywales: who is on the top of the dark battleboats list after only four games?

ColonelCrockett: Thanks, is Fencer looking into this scam, Makes us all out to be fools

wellywales: the problem is that this isnt really cheating .. its misguiding their opponents .. but all inside the rules .. its abusing a feature .. but not cheating (imo)

the 2 top players of hyper gammon though ... that might be something different .. but even about that i am not too sure :)

I've offered this guy an 11-hours-per-move dark boats game, hoping to beat him with his own "weapon". :)

Pedro Martínez: trust you to be that evil :)

Pedro Martínez: good for you, I just don't have that much time or I'd do the same!

Pedro: Good on you. Sock it to him!

grenv: Aye, ignorance is something that we should scorn and look down upon. Let the fools and their money be parted. We who are clever and smart an on the ball can profit by them and good luck to any of us who does so in a systematic way. Don't suffer the fools gladly - gladly make the fools suffer!

Have I expressed your attitude correctly there?

playBunny: I have no sympathy for the fools. So, for instance, their ratings should suffer from timing out in such a situation.

However I do not condone the guilty party, and propose his account be terminated and he be removed from the list.

So you were only half right, but thanks for trying.

And yes I think ignorance should absolutely be scorned, but corrected rather than looked down upon.

grenv: Hm . . . at least one dictionary defines "scorn" as "look down upon", so you may need to amend your choice of words.

grenv: I was banned from the ponds DB for calling people ignorant and fools....

Czuch: Did you name names or address a class of people?

Czuch Chuckers: If a person is ignorant, your time is better spent educating him than insulting him. If he is truly a fool, nothing you can say will change that, so why take that negativity upon yourself?

alanback: I meant that ignorance should be scorned. Ignorant people should be educated. Who would like to be first?

grenv: Does that make me the first?

alanback:

grenv: I've a gammon loss that I'm trying to fend off. I desperately need to know how to do that thing with the chicken.

playBunny: i believe I just helped you already on the move I just made. The chicken was a red herring apparently.

grenv: You did, you did! I think it's because I appeased the Dice Gods with another trio of my youngest.

robtoo has put me on his enemies list...

Pedro Martínez: ...and i noticed that i am
one of Frolinds enemies

Andersp: That's relevant. Well done.

frolind: que?

grenv: SCAM!!! He should be drawn and quartered, figuratively speaking of course. I say we flood his games page with challenges, until he either has to play some people or delete, say, 200 challenges a day...

BBW Did you report robyou/roguetoo, or whatever his name is, and BaDBoY to Fencer by any chance?

playBunny:Hope so, He couild be on the top all the time, unless we all play at that game

is it possible to get a gammon (2 points) or backgammon (3 points) in a game of anti-backgammon ?

Hrqls: No, unless your opponent resigns. I've already reported it to the BugTracker. (a month ago or so)