reward timeouts

For suggestions for new features to add to the site. Even if you don't have a sugestion at least vote on the features important to you.
Post Reply
jlambe
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 5:17 pm

reward timeouts

Post by jlambe » Sun Jan 06, 2008 12:29 pm

Theres nothing worse than posting a match and several players joining only to time out later. Would it be possible to add a feature to the match page where you can set criteria to join by a min number of timeouts. This would reward those who try to finish all thier matches and ecourage others to either finish their game or at least resign and not keep players waiting on the clock to run down.

davebrown
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 2:10 pm
Location: East Coast USA
Contact:

Post by davebrown » Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:54 am

Some folks have played thousands of games on this site. It would be reasonable for those folks to have a high number of timeouts. To keep from inadvertently preventing them from joining games, having a way to enter a maximum percentage of timeouts or a simple check box that excludes anyone with 50% or more timeouts might be better.
A beginning is the time for taking the most delicate care that the balances are correct.
from "Manual of Muad'Dib"
by the Princess Irulan

gmiller
Site Admin
Posts: 1274
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 1999 11:13 am
Location: Jeffersonville, IN
Contact:

Post by gmiller » Sun Feb 03, 2008 11:27 pm

Usually players that time out never come back to the site, so there's no way to penalize them. I've yet to see a regular player who frequently times out. Also, frequent players may time out on many games due to understandable circumstances.
Greg Miller

sonrisante
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2000 6:40 pm
Location: california

Post by sonrisante » Tue Jun 17, 2008 10:57 am

I agree with the frustration, but also agree with Greg's assessment. the only feasible way to implement this would be to limit games to non-provisional users. but this isn't good either because then everyone would choose that option and new users would have a hard time finding games to play.

cliff
Posts: 572
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Post by cliff » Tue Mar 10, 2009 11:12 pm

gmiller wrote:Usually players that time out never come back to the site, so there's no way to penalize them. I've yet to see a regular player who frequently times out. Also, frequent players may time out on many games due to understandable circumstances.
True enough, Greg. But I've taken a look and I've compiled a list of about 15 player do it as a pretty common thing- some timing out in 30-40% of their games! I think that's pretty much an indication that they're the problem. Not someone who suddenly after a year or two just times out for awhile. That would indicate a health or computer problem possible.

I'd love to have a way to challenge players who only have a timeout of maybe 5 - 10 %, similar to the way the ratings part of the challange screen works. Would that be a posibility?

icyglare
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:08 am

Post by icyglare » Thu Mar 12, 2009 2:51 pm

Yahoo has it so that there are two timers, one for the game and one per move. Let's say the timer is 30 minutes + 10 seconds per move, with a maximum timer of 10 minutes per move. We could implement something similar, such as if you do not move in 10 days, you automatically forfeit regardless of how much time you have left.

joelag
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 3:30 pm
Location: Rhineland/Germany

Post by joelag » Fri Mar 13, 2009 5:47 am

icyglare wrote:Yahoo has it so that there are two timers, one for the game and one per move. Let's say the timer is 30 minutes + 10 seconds per move, with a maximum timer of 10 minutes per move. We could implement something similar, such as if you do not move in 10 days, you automatically forfeit regardless of how much time you have left.
You should consider that there are people who enjoy being offline for 3 weeks once or twice in a year (i.e. me). Since Greg hasn't implemented some vacation mechanism your idea doesn't work (for me).

If we had a vacation policy I'd like your suggestion.

CU, Joe

mateau
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 8:34 pm

Adjournments and time controls to limit timeouts

Post by mateau » Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:25 pm

joelag wrote:
icyglare wrote:Yahoo has it so that there are two timers, one for the game and one per move. Let's say the timer is 30 minutes + 10 seconds per move, with a maximum timer of 10 minutes per move. We could implement something similar, such as if you do not move in 10 days, you automatically forfeit regardless of how much time you have left.
You should consider that there are people who enjoy being offline for 3 weeks once or twice in a year (i.e. me). Since Greg hasn't implemented some vacation mechanism your idea doesn't work (for me).

If we had a vacation policy I'd like your suggestion.

CU, Joe
A vacation Notice to Adjourn button next to or near the move button would activate a A Vacation or Personal adjournment and it would activate across your entire tournament and match itinerary. It could only be activated with notice AND AFTER YOUR MOVE. This way all of your games are current.


All games have to have a current move before you can adjourn and notice has to be given so players don't immediately respond with a move. After the adjournment is in place the responding move should be a hidden move until the adjournment period has been lifted by the adjournment requesting player.


The Adjournment becomes deactivated either at end of the time period it was intitially set or by simply logging on to any game you are playing and punch the "End Adjournment" button. All hidden moves then become visible and play is resumed. This is very close to the way games are adjourned over-the-board where a move is written and sealed. However since this adjourment is at the request of and favors the requesting player then his move is not sealed.

Adjourment requests would also be counted to avoid excesses. There should be a limit.


I'm sure that Mr. Miller can program this little mod into the system.

How about this for a time control:

15 moves in 30 days. After 15 moves then it's +2 days per move, 5 (or 7) days without a move is a -2 day penalty, the second violation a -3 day penalty and the ending of any + 2 days per move for both players, the third violation ends the game as a time out loss.

Basically nothing changes except players who don't move get shut down quickly and painlessly.

Any game played between players with established ratings over 1800 is rated regardless of amount of moves played or whether the game has been abandoned. These are players with some experience and history they should know better.

NO TOURNAMENTS for provisionally rated players.

Provisional rated players may not play other provisional rated players in rated games. This will help deflate ratings a bit.

A optional provisional rating exclusion for tournaments, challenges and match play should be put in place. New members and provisional rated players according the Greg Miller seem to be the biggest offenders.

cliff
Posts: 572
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Post by cliff » Sat Apr 04, 2009 10:40 pm

I'd have to say that Mateau has some interesting ideas, and certainly one or two of them I'd like to see implemented myself!

Having said that, I think if ALL of those suggestions were implemented, the whole time-control/challange screen would get far too wacky!

And I don't see any reason why provisionally rated players should be excluded from tournaments! Sure, the ratings as they stand might be a bit inflated (I KNOW I'm no 2300 player!), but at least they're inflated accross the board pretty much, so I wouldn't want to see things get too complex!

mateau
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 8:34 pm

Post by mateau » Sun Apr 05, 2009 11:59 am

cliff wrote:I'd have to say that Mateau has some interesting ideas, and certainly one or two of them I'd like to see implemented myself!

Having said that, I think if ALL of those suggestions were implemented, the whole time-control/challange screen would get far too wacky!

And I don't see any reason why provisionally rated players should be excluded from tournaments! Sure, the ratings as they stand might be a bit inflated (I KNOW I'm no 2300 player!), but at least they're inflated accross the board pretty much, so I wouldn't want to see things get too complex!
Well, I'm just tossing ideas against the wall in the hope that something sticks.

Obviously not everything is possible or even viable as you pointed out, but there is a problem regarding some players who fail to respond and that failure can be addressed in time controls.

What is disappointing to me is that no effort has been made to contain or eliminate this problem.

So I guess the real effort is convincing Greg that he could evolve the time control in the hope of creating a positive effect. And at the same time make his site a much more rewarding experience.

Oh yeah, this is not a thread regarding ratings and I don't think that it really matters much either. I am no 2130 player either, however it would be nice to think so.

Post Reply