MASTERMIND: I like watchin other people's games to improve my own game mostly, particularly games like Atomic Chess where there isn't a lot of theory. Professional chess players don't get to hide their games. :)

I've included single wins for these as so few games have been completed so far.


Rank…..Played ..........Won ........…….......... Rating
..1 ..............3 ................1 ..........33.3%.......... Unrated .......... Mach Machovic
..2 ..............3 ................1 ..........33.3%.......... Unrated .......... Skittles
..3 ..............6 ................2 ..........33.3%.......... 1640P ............ furbster
..4 ............23 ................5 ..........21.7%.......... 2065P ............ Pedro Martínez
..5 ............14 ................3 ..........21.4%.......... 1848P ............ Matarilevich
..6 ..............5 ................1 ..........20.0%.......... 1626P ............ Ferjo
..7 ............20 ................3 ..........15.0%.......... 1708P ............ BIG BAD WOLF
..8 ............16 ................2 ..........12.5%.......... 1466P ............ karij
..9 ............17 ................2 ..........11.8%.......... 1752P ............ Pbarb2
10 ..............9 ................1 ..........11.1%.......... 1266P ............ Andre Faria
11 ............11 ................1 ............9.1%.......... 1453P ............ Maxxina
12 ............13 ................1 ............7.7%.......... 1585P ............ Nothingness
13 ............13 ................1 ............7.7%.......... 1645P ............ arpa
14 ............14 ................1 ............7.1%.......... 1182P ............ Arctic Warrior

MASTERMIND: those are 2 differing issues ... people look at other peoples games when they try to find a system in their moves .. probably to find a weakness when playing against them, or to learn from them when they think those players are good players

people dont like cloak mode because they are a bit paranoid and want to know what other people are doing .. they want to see if they arent being watched themselves, etc. ... and some people dont like cloak mode because they cant see if their opponents are online playing games at that moment or doing something else (like reading boards, managing their fellowships, etc.) so they know if they have to stay around a bit longer in case their opponent makes a move in their games

Czuch Chuckers:I'm begining to wonder why other people like to view other peoples games anyways,and don't like cloak mode why?

Congratulations to the winners,point system will be calculated as soon as i catch up on my games.

#1 Erinity
#2 fra
#3 Mach Machovic
#4 Mach Machovic
#5 grenv
#6 basplund
#7 basplund
#8 Scooter
#9 basplund
#10 not finished
#11 not finished
#12 Pedro Martinez
#13 Pedro Martinez
#14 Pedro Martinez
#15 Maria Anna
#16 Monica
#17 TIGER005
#18 Vikings
#19 Nina
#20 basplund
#21 TIGER005
#22 Pedro Martinez
#23 Pedro Martinez
#24 Pedro Martinez
#25 MASTERMIND
#26 unfinished
#27 Pbarb2
#28 Vikings
#29 Pedro Martinez
#30 tonyth

Thanks to all who have participated,and continue to have fun and enjoy.

Your friend
Mike :o)

Universal Eyes: You just admited you noticed,i modified my post,is that not what you said when i was viewing a game?

What?

Universal Eyes: I've just noticed you edited your post with the info on the fact that I won three of your ponds in a row and twice...is that what you call "caught with proof"...can I ask you with proof of what? Dig as deep as you want....

Universal Eyes: No, I have no clue what you're talking about.

Let me take it step by step:
Once upon a time, I saw you viewing this game, which is a game where your father refuses to realize that there's no way he can win it and doesn't accept my draw offers. I sent you a PM, asking you what do you think about this game. That's it. Nothing else. No connection whatsoever to ponds. Why the heck are you bringing this up?

In another game, I told you I didn't like cloak mode because it disallows me to see what my opponents are doing when we play our games move after move. Period. Nothing else. Now can you please explain to me why are you talking about this on a board that is dedicated to ponds? And what does this mean?
1. that person has told me that they hate the cloak mode,which use to allow them to get moves from other players instantly

2. the've been caught with proof on more then 3 occasions

I want you to explain it.

if there are an odd amount of peopel in teh rain pond and no mroe than 2 exit each rd than draws are impossible.

Time for an update.

We now have 54 players with 2 wins or more out of a total number of players of 220.

Rank…..Played ..........Won ........…….......... Rating

..1 ............10 ................5 ..........50.0%.......... 2236P .......... Mike UK
..2 ............20 ................6 ..........30.0%.......... 2576P .......... basplund
..3 ..........370 ..............74 ..........20.0%.......... 2643 ............ Pedro Martínez
..4 ............82 ..............16 ..........19.5%.......... 2446 ............ furbster
..5 ............11 ................2 ..........18.2%.......... 2086P .......... MariaAnna
..6 ..........353 ..............64 ..........18.1%.......... 2638 ............ Vikings
..7 ..........267 ..............34 ..........12.7%.......... 2488 ............ Maxxina
..8 ............16 ................2 ..........12.5%.......... 2144P .......... Hanis
..9 ..........268 ..............31 ..........11.6%.......... 2464 ............ BIG BAD WOLF
10 ............18 ................2 ..........11.1%.......... 2538P .......... Jannssen
11 ............27 ................3 ..........11.1%.......... 2310 ............ Luisifer
12 ............28 ................3 ..........10.7%.......... 2700 ............ Matarilevich
13 ............19 ................2 ..........10.5%.......... 1936P .......... NOT a floosie
14 ..........125 ..............13 ..........10.4%.......... 2127 ............ rabbitoid
15 ............39 ................4 ..........10.3%.......... 2533 ............ zockerdotcom
16 ............59 ................6 ..........10.2%.......... 2477 ............ aissi
17 ..........109 ..............11 ..........10.1%.......... 2230 ............ Czuch Chuckers
18 ..........100 ..............10 ..........10.0%.......... 2247 ............ Flake
19 ............31 ................3 ............9.7%.......... 1970 ............ Sinay
20 ............64 ................6 ............9.4%.......... 2198 ............ Erinity
21 ............33 ................3 ............9.1%.......... 2228 ............ jitkasafa
22 ............22 ................2 ............9.1%.......... 2251P .......... TIGER0005
23 ............36 ................3 ............8.3%.......... 2544 ............ Mely
24 ............88 ................7 ............8.0%.......... 2306 ............ Andre Faria
25 ............26 ................2 ............7.7%.......... 2578 ............ Londo
26 ............26 ................2 ............7.7%.......... 2123 ............ pgt
27 ............68 ................5 ............7.4%.......... 1922 ............ Labbeda
28 ............41 ................3 ............7.3%.......... 2493 ............ arpa
29 ............28 ................2 ............7.1%.......... 2020 ............ lukulus
30 ............29 ................2 ............6.9%.......... 1855 ............ drgnrdr
31 ..........147 ..............10 ............6.8%.......... 2209 ............ Monica
32 ............59 ................4 ............6.8%.......... 1870 ............ Jofaserimon
33 ............45 ................3 ............6.7%.......... 2229 ............ ScarletRose
34 ..........294 ..............19 ............6.5%.......... 2410 ............ tonyh
35 ............49 ................3 ............6.1%.......... 2522 ............ Jason
36 ............51 ................3 ............5.9%.......... 2164 ............ alexlee
37 ............86 ................5 ............5.8%.......... 1892 ............ kitti
38 ..........111 ................6 ............5.4%.......... 2072 ............ Hannelore
39 ............38 ................2 ............5.3%.......... 1755 ............ hyncaba
40 ..........161 ................8 ............5.0%.......... 2599 ............ Pbarb2
41 ............41 ................2 ............4.9%.......... 2313 ............ karij
42 ..........146 ................7 ............4.8%.......... 2200 ............ Mach Machovic
43 ..........151 ................6 ............4.0%.......... 2355 ............ Nothingness
44 ..........102 ................4 ............3.9%.......... 2482 ............ Bry
45 ............78 ................3 ............3.8%.......... 1497 ............ macik
46 ............82 ................3 ............3.7%.......... 2050 ............ grenv
47 ............56 ................2 ............3.6%.......... 2313 ............ Backoff
48 ............56 ................2 ............3.6%.......... 1524 ............ Tina Maurencova
49 ............69 ................2 ............2.9%.......... 1959 ............ Daniel Snyder
50 ............72 ................2 ............2.8%.......... 1977 ............ abnznz
51 ..........125 ................3 ............2.4%.......... 2346 ............ fra
52 ............88 ................2 ............2.3%.......... 2165 ............ dexter
53 ..........166 ................3 ............1.8%.......... 2350 ............ BerniceC
54 ..........374 ................3 ............0.8%.......... 1580 ............ Arctic Warrior

Scooter: As I said earlier, this points out a flaw to the play of "Run around the Pond". A major flaw from my point of view. As is also the case in a game called Risk when played with three or more people. I'll do what I did for playing Risk, and that is that I am no longer going to play this game either. You can have all your fun without me. As for me being bitter, I'm not. It is the game, not you that is flawed. Lots of people still like the game, flawed or not by how I define it. They and you can still play it and have fun. I can't. I didn't realize this game was one of those types that I avoid. I should've seen it before it came down to this example, but the game has a lot of enteresting points to it. The politics of playing it are the thing I don't like, and that is why I'm not going to play it any more. I won't do as you did though. I will continue in the games that I have remaining fully trying to win each game if I'm able. It's the least I can do for my opponent's opponents.

Walter Montego:

Oh come one now, no need to get all bitter dude. Ok, I do play to win for the most part. But its not the only thing. Maybe its a difference of philosophy between people. Some people play for fun, some play to win. Sure everyone would like to win, but its not the end of the world if they don't. Some people just do not take it as seriously as you do. And again, I did not want to just resign. That wasn't the point of my move there.

And I don't think I ruined it for anyone (you included). You have to accept that this is a multi-player game and people's actions are unpredictable. Some people bet 5,000 points in the first round... why?? I have no idea, but it "ruins" for people trying to get the bonus by betting 502 points. There are tons of examples where people bet illogically and that is just something that comes with this game. Its unpredictable. Don't get you panties all in a bunch about it, just go play another pond, there are plenty to play!

And your suspicion of a conspiracy are so far fetched its stupid. If we wanted to conspire I wouldn't have posted a message saying I was going to bet 1! Come on now, how lame is that for a conspiracy?? Wouldn't I have just emailed one or both of them in secret?? I can think of so many other was to cheat besides posting a message for EVERYONE to see.

I did what I did because you asked someone to bet 1 or 2! You said it in your post! All I did was think about the repercussions of that and took it to the next step. I wondered if anyone would even believe it if I said I was going to do it.... and thought it would make for an interesting experiment. No cheating or conspiracy here. Maybe you're watching too many x-files...

Scooter: Yeah, right. Had I known I was playing a game with someone that doesn't care if they win or not, I would not have played with you in it. This is true for me in two handed games as it is in multi-player games. As I say, "The object of a game is to win, but the reason to play a game is to have fun." If your idea of having fun is to ruin a game for other people, then you've certainly had your fun here. Bidding 1 made sure you'd lose, no matter what anybody else bid. If you didn't want to play in that particular Pond any more, you should've just kept quiet and bid your 1. Skewing the results as you've done gives those guys with nothing to lose a chance at getting back in a game one of them was losing badly in. Had you bid 10 as Hrqls suggested or 117 as I did, then it would've served them right for taking the chance. But one of them was going to profit by doing it in any case. Perhaps the rest of us in the Pond should have all bid 23. I think the next time someone makes an announcement of this nature in a Pond that I'm playing in, I will write a few players and see what they want to do about it. One of us could bid 2 and the rest of us 3. That should eliminate the problem. And if you change your mind and bid high, only one of the rest us will drop out and the others will just lose 3 points.

Just a game. Yeah, that's all it is. Any time I hear someone say that, I hope I'm not playing a game with them and feel sorry for the person that is playing them. If I win the game it doesn't matter or if I lose the game it doesn't matter against a person with this attitude. So what's the point in playing the game in the first place? Of course it's just a game, so what is meant when this is said? You played the game to lose, I don't like playing with losers. I want to play games with winners. Whether or not I win the game is besides the point. If I wanted to lose, I can certainly do it without causing the grief you have. In a two player game, you can resign or move to lose and it's over. In this multi-player game it's just that easy to lose also, but how you lose directly affects the remaining players. What do you think the long running discussion about resigning in "Run around the Pond" has been about? Simple, fairness to the remaining players. Lots of ideas have been proposed to allow someone to resign without affecting the game or to minimize the affect of their resigning. Had you really wanted to quit, you could have done something of that nature, but no, you did what you did and then you bid 1. You acted unilaterally without concern for the remaining players and then you wonder why people aren't happy? Saying sorry to me is all well and good, but I'm not the only one affected by how you handled this including the two players that bid 2 and 10. Whether or not they communicated with each other or with you about your plan is a moot point, but it will leave a taint on them that won't be easily washed off and forgotten. Your writing now in light of how things went down smacks of making the present fit the past. One thing that is good about the whole affair, you're out of the game now, loser. Considering how high your win percentage is in the many games that you play here, I'm really having a tough time believing that you'd purposely play a game to lose. Something just isn't adding up, but in fairness and to give you the benefit of the doubt, I'll just say to myself that you made a mistake and didn't consider the ramifications of such a simple act and I won't go as a far as some here that have openly accused you of cheating or throwing the game. It may or may not be a conspiracy, but it has all the markings of one and this is why a few of us have gotten upset about it.

Walter Montego: In response to your response to my post...

You see there in lies the fun and interesting part. You didn't know, and no one else knew if I was telling the truth! Thats what made it interesting. Now if everyone knew I was a pathological liar, then no one would have bet 1 or 2 or 10. Honestly Bry and Pedro are pretty good players at this pond thing and thats why they probably took the chance. It is after all just a game and if they were wrong, they just fall in the pond... so what?? It was a risk they took and they were pretty smart about it I think...

And so I wasn't in it to win! That is obvious, if I was, I wouldn't have bet just 1. Now why didn't I care about winning? Like I said I play for fun and do not get caught up in ratings... I had more fun experimenting on this game then just putting in another bid...

Sorry you don't see my point and I'm sorry you got the short end of it... but what was I supossed to do, look up everyone's number of games they played in and then think "oh geez, this person doesn't have enough experience in this game"... come on.... thats just silly. In any case it doesn't matter if you only had little experience, because I had never done that before and Bry and Pedro had no reason to believe me more than you!

For those people that aren't all sour about this I think its a fascinating result. Bry bids two absolutely believing me that I will bid 1, which I think may have been too trusting. Pedro bids 10! Honestly I didn't see that happening, but he is two steps ahead of me and Bry and hedges his bet thinking that if I am bluffing and I do bid 3,4 or even 5, he is covered! Nice move if you ask me... he is also covered in the sense that he almost certainly believes there is someone else probably going to trust me and that if someone does bet 2 and I bet the normal range of whatever (3,000 or so) then he is still covered in the sense that someone else will fall in the pond...

This makes for so many possible outcomes and gets into stratgic psychology... very interesting! Which was what I was shooting for. Sorry if I hurt your feelings Montego...

Walter Montego: *nod* :) .. its worth a try in another pond ;)

Universal Eyes: it seems you got us all confused .. please enlighten us simple human beings ;)

Hrqls: Had the scenario you just laid out happened, I would've been very impressed with the play. And though I might've had some concerns, I would've kept them to myself and tipped my hat to some fine play by the opponents.

I'm lost as well. How do you get moves from other players. I understand you can see if they've been on line, but you get that even for cloaked people.

Andre Faria: wasnt explaining, just translating, and I think there was more to it as well, but I am not sure.

Czuch Chuckers: Uhhh, that explains it...LOL

Czuch Chuckers: Now I´m puzzled. How can they get moves from other players?

how would it be possible to get other players' moves? one or many nicks, cloak or not cloak doesn't make any difference here.

Let me try....

There is someone playing the same ponds with more than one nik and they dont like the cloak mode feature because it messes up their ability to instantly get moves from other players.

Hrqls: More than that...if I read it correctly, not only that "that person" uses the cloak mode to get other people's bets instantly, (s)he also hates that...

Universal Eyes: if i read it correctly you say that the cloak function can give your other players bets instantly ?

Universal Eyes: Can you please translate your previous post into English?

Scooter:Interesting concept but that still does not explain the 1-2 and 10 bid.
BBW already pointed out a similar situation where i believe he lost a pond because of it as well as one of the bidders being the same person in regards to this pond and futher more,that person has told me that they hate the cloak mode,which use to allow them to get moves from other players instantly.

I know for a fact that person will read this and know the've been caught with proof on more then 3 occasions.

(13. June 2005, 20:13:44) Who could the winner be - let me guess... furbster?

Congrats! (even if it is not furbster)


wow good guess lol

actually, come to think about it a bit more, probably a better than even chance for a draw: the minimum number of participants is set to 16, a lot of ponds start with that number. out of 180 ponds now running, 130 have an initial even number of participants, 50 odd.

rabbitoid: I think it could be a lot higher than 50% no-winners. Think carefully how you would bet in a 3-man finish and you'll see what I mean.

1 - 0 for me
50% draws for rain ponds, in the long run.
http://brainking.com/en/Pond?g=727&trnst=3

Walter Montego: i like the psychological aspect of this .. it adds some more to the game ...

it was just a test ot guts i guess .. but as you said by betting 1 scooter could have gained nothing from it .. that was just to confuse the game (and thereby ruining it a bit for some other players) ... i would have loved the move a LOT if he would have bet 10 (and bry 12, and pedro 20) ... that would be a great psychological game (although he would have lost that way as well ... it would love the way it was played :))

Scooter: There's just one big problem with this explanation, you bid 1! There's no way you can win a game if you make this play. Rationalize all you want to, but that's the truth. If you were really bluffing, you certainly could have bid 3 or 117 on that turn, but you bid 1. This gives you no chance to win the game. You want to resign, fine, but announcing it and then giving it away like that more or less allowed the two players that knew you to bid in confidence that they'd be fairly safe. Since they've played umpteen number of games, they also had little to lose but the experience of being tricked by you if they didn't know you. Whereas me, who has played just a few games of Run around the Pond was completely without a clue as to what to make of your pronouncement. I figured there's nothing I could do but hope the other players would ignore you and I played on this assumption. Now you come back and say it was me that inspired you? Just what are you saying? You take advice from someone that's never made it to the final five (me)? You make a play that guarantees that you'll lose, plus others will either believe you and not realize the trouble coming their way for being right? OK, if you're that naive then perhaps I can excuse this whole chain of events, but from how I see that things went down this is a hard thing to swallow.

As for anyone just announcing how much they going to bid on their next turn, yeah sure, it's just a bluff. I see no problem with doing that and that's what makes this particular case the trouble that it is. Since we all know it's just a bunch of hot air, what's the deal with two people going for believing him? If he's using my question as a reason to bid 1 as the excuse for actually doing it, why'd Pedro and Bry buy into it? Are they that good that they can see he was actually going to make such a game losing play? Had he bid 117 Bry would've drop into the Pond. I would still not like this going on, but at least it would have been believable and collusion would be a lot harder to come to my mind. But no, Bry bids 2 and Pedro bids 10. Now I ask you, in a game where everyone else bids over 1000, what would you think? If you guys are really this good at the game, then I have another reason for not playing it any more. I'm out of my league.

Hey just to let you all know, if you look at the discussion, I got the idea from Walter Montego himself! In his previous post, right before mine, he asks if anyone would like to bet 1 or 2. So on a whim, and since I play for fun and do not get caught up in ratings, I decided to take him up on it! He asked for it, so I did it. I further thought that because, even if I did decide to bet just 1, it would defeat the purpose of me doing so if I didn't tell anyone, so I went ahead and posted to everyone that I would... I though it made for an interesting experiment of sorts, because so much psychology can come into place there. So in any case I think only Pedro and Bry took the chance...

But I do want to point out that it was not collusion or cheating. Just plain fun and mind games... which I don't see anything wrong with in this game... just adds to the fun, as long as people are not colluding and cheating...

I don't aee anything wrong with someone stating what they might be betting next... s/he could just be bluffing... or doing it for real.. the thing is there is no real incentive for people to just lose on purpose, and I don't plan on making this a habit, but thought it would be an interesting outcome... which it was.

But I could have also stated that I was going to bet 3000 points and then decided not to do that either... I think that would actually make for a more interesting game... kind of like poker a little as someone else said...

Maybe call it midnight showers...

Fencer... Do we need to keep our umbrellas handy when we are out at night?

Bry: This is exactly what I said to do though worded differently:

Walter Montego Re: 13. June 2005, 09:46:24
Czuch Chuckers: If someone resigns, a notice could be sent to all people in the Pond and the time moved to the next day's time. Since we now have one less player it wouldn't add to the length of the Pond doing that. Everyone involved would get plenty of time to change their bid or leave it alone.

Your refunding of the points would be the same as putting the resigning person into the pond and adding a move's time to the game so that everyone could again figure on what to bid. I like this idea and it seems the fairest way to allow someone to resign without screwing the game up.

ClayNashvilleTn: SWEET!!!!! I will pm you where to send my checks :)

Czuch Chuckers: Well then look at the positive side Chuck. We'll get it patented as a game and make millions!

ClayNashvilleTn: Being a poker player, I do like the added dimension of the "bluff".... but for this site, I like just calling it cheating and deal with offenders from there.

Seems it is only cheating when it is for the purpose of boosting ratings. The only way this is done is for someone to be playing several memberships themselves and all be in the same pond. But I think having more than one paid membership isalready cheating isnt it? Anyway, it all gets very complicated, and like Wally said, there may be no way to stop it.... unless Fencer adds a rule to the pond games that says it is cheating to announce your bid in a pond run, even if you do it in jest?

Seriously, it could just be an added tactic. What if I said I am only going to bid 10 this next round. Say I had actually done so in the past and lucked out because someon believed me and bet 11 and I actually bid 15? Now I have gained from that NEW added tactic. It does have merit for discussion doesn't it? There are games in poker where you bluff?

Bry: DANG now I dont know what to do!

BIG BAD WOLF: Well maybe nothing to do with the mods then, but if it is cheating (and losing on pupose is considered cheating) then something should be done to modify the rules to reflect that it is not allowed!

ClayNashvilleTn: That's interesting - seems very similar to Scooter's post...

"Just for fun (since its only a game anyway), I will bet one (1), and I'm sure to fall into the pond! Now lets see who believes me and tries to take advantage of my generosity! Of course I could be bluffing and then go ahead and bet something like 5 and hope that someone bets 2 thinking I'll bet 1! But no, I am not that clever or devious, so I am betting just 1. So go ahead and bet 2 and I promise you'll stay dry! This should be interesting to say the least!!".

BIG BAD WOLF: I agree, this discussion has nothing to with Moderation.

I agree, players shouldnt be allowed to state their next bet. It was wrong. Currently there is no "resign" option. The pond it relates to is a 5-day pond that has been going on for months. Perhaps Scooter got sick of keep waiting for it? - but couldnt resign, so thought it would be amusing to see if anyone gambled on his proposed bet....

Either way, what's done is done. I'm glad I saw it and gambled on it.

Bry: hmmmmmmmmmm If I am serious it might be ruled as cheating based on what Chuck has just said but, if I am joking then everything will be fine? Now which is Clay doing? Guess wrong and go wrong.

Bry: I'm not sure why we would need to go through any extra trouble.

The solution is simple - let them bid 0, but they need to just not tell anyone what they are doing.

I wouldn't use the word 'cheating' because the perpetrator doesn't gain anything from doing it. However I think it is bad sportmanship, ruining the game for everybody else.

Czuch Chuckers: I only stated that I think it is cheating coming from a playing member.

A Global Moderator main purpose is to watch over the discussion boards, not to decide on who is cheating and what actions need to be taken. That's beyond me.

But saying what you are going to bid is like telling the other person in Battleboats where your boats are - or telling someone is Chess how to checkmate themselves.