Walter Montego: Slow play might be within the rules, but for me it is not in the spirit of the game unless explicitly stated in advance.

I couldn't agree more.

When I did the "I like it fast" tourneys, complete with the motorbike icon, I was on the alert for slow people to remove. Somehow I never had to. Maybe something to do with the name? ;o)

The Thirteen tourney that Furbster brought up is an auto-pass tourney; says so right at the bottom of every page. So why do I have to wait for my opponent's clicks when he's stuck on the bar?! :-S

Hrqls: Lol. I'm tempted. ;o)

playBunny: This is why I will use the Fischer Clock if I ever organize another tournament, or simply remove the slowpokes, or since we have the option now, ban certain individuals from joining tournaments I organize. Slow play might be within the rules, but for me it is not in the spirit of the game unless explicitly stated in advance. I am so leery of joining tournaments for the same reason. I don't know why, I am after all a life member of the site, but I want a conclusion to a game within a shorter time than five years or a decade as this tournament linked below seems to be taking. A few months seems more than long enough for a round. I usually create a game with an initial 7 days, and then make the speed about 3 moves per week with a limit of a week and a half or two weeks. There used to be a fast movers club on this site, but I suppose it is no longer used much.

And if I must rant about something, why is it that someone can shut off the "auto-pass" in a game that I have created? I still don't understand why Fencer likes it like that. It took him many years to even add the "auto-pass" and with much resistance on his part, and then he must have listened to the wimps and whiners that aren't even Backgammon players and made it for them unless, that is, he is one of them and I know he is not a Backgammon player, or at least he wasn't back then when I stopped playing Backgammon over the not having an "auto-pass" at all.

The game creator should have the choice. If the person joining doesn't like it, then that person should not play that game with that person. Simple. Just as if I create a game and only take one color and the other person doesn't like it, then don't play with me or send me a message and let's talk about it. I used to only play single games of Backgammon. In those the "auto-pass" happens regularly, but in match play, it is a lot less frequent as it is set up on this site.

playBunny: speed it up ... off a double at the first move! ;)

furbster: My bet is that one of these pairs will be the ones to make us wait years.

Backgammon (milionovej kluk vs. rod03801) and Backgammon (rod03801 vs. milionovej kluk)

or Backgammon (playBunny vs. Somelaughs2) and Backgammon (Somelaughs2 vs. playBunny)

Only 4 moves made by each slowcoach in the time that it's taken for the absentees to timeout 13 points.

:slow headshake, downcast eyes, grey cloud with rain:

Now all i can do is wait.... but for how long?
LUCKY THIRTEEN

speachless: I don't think I did, but in any event, I suspect it was the same person, so it matters not which name was (not) mentioned! This was not meant to be a witch hunt - just an observation.

Resher: I can confirm that pgt didn't write any name down. But since he mentioned so many details about the user people could figure it out more as easily...

pgt: I think your initial post mentioned the wrong player, so might confuse people if it were still visible.  I think you posted the name of the opponent in those 15 games you mentioned.

using names is not prohibited per definition (i think) ... but in some cases it could lead to a witch hunt which has happened too many times in the past

sometimes a witch hunt can be justified, but sometimes not and it might be quite subjective or due to lack of all information

therefore a witch hunt is prohibited and the gms will try to prevent it from happening

of course if you have a problem with a specific player there are many ways to handle it :
- contact him directly
- pm a mod / gm / fencer
- use a fellowship
- <and probably some more>

since the brainking.com seems to be more easy going (and more quiet) the last couple of years we are (at least i am) losening control a bit, as long as it doesnt get out of hand

happyjuggler0: lol :)

speachless: My initial post pointed out that (an un-named player) had played and won 15 of his or her 30 games with the same player. The games were all marked as "private" so it was impossible to confrim that they were genuine games. The game in question was Hyper Backgammon.

happyjuggler0: LOL - it's almost impossible to understand the treat 'cause the initial post of pgt were deleted :-)

I'm not going to pretend to understand this thread, but I will say that I'm glad to hear that I am innocent of whatever I wasn't accused of doing.

:)

speachless: Glad to hear that.

playBunny: pgt didn't mean happyjuggler.... pgt wrote about hyper backgammon

Pedro Martínez: Because you cannot mention a name here…

Ah, I see. I don't see why the GM didn't just bleep the name out of the post.

If the name was happyjuggler then I suggest that anyone who doubts his skills goes to play him on FIBS where they'll have a good fight on their hands. Note that he also only plays long matches, which is the best way of maximising an already considerable skill advantage.

If it's the unnameable player placed second, who has demonstrated a fantastic ability to copy moves from GnuBg into a BrainKing game page, well, he's been getting away with that for years. Just pretend that you're playing GnuBg when you play him and be suitably pleased and impressed with yourself if you win. ;o)

Pedro Martínez: oh, I understand... and yes, it makes sense...

speachless: Because you cannot mention a name here… names are bad. Nicknames are bad, too. It doesn't matter that naming names is not prohibited in the User Agreement, the GMs just decided that you can't do that.
http://brainking.com/en/Board?bc=1&plla=1130884

Pedro Martínez: why should a GM remove a post? the post wasn't problematic i think... funny as well...

playBunny: The beginning of the conversation was removed, possibly by a GM. As usual, no word has been posted as an explanation thereof…

playBunny: oh, that's funny. i replied to the user pgt, but maybe he just deleted his previews post... :-) actually pgt wanted fencer to delete a user from brainking, because pgt meant a user, which is on position 1 on the ranking of a backgammon variation game - would have probably played against a fake user account to reach the 1st place. Pedro replied then to pgt with the link to the ones who wanted fencer to delete this user ...

so that's all about :-)

playBunny: He snared us both, did he? He's still got the touch even with the long hiatus. I've plenty of time to kill in this truck stop today, so maybe I'll check into it in awhile. If I do, I'll report my findings.

As for the question about the bug, I thought you had said a few things about that some time ago. I remember the identical roll business, but that's fixed. What's the other deal?

Walter Montego: Lol. I also checked that link and had a large count drop to zero. ;o)

But what I meant was which paully post was he replying to? There isn't one in sight so there's also no "him". Similarly speachless' post is rather mysterious. It's shown as being in the same thread as Pedro's yet without the pgt post that she's responding to.

playBunny: It got me to check the link, and now after all these years my BrainKing.com discussion board count is zero after getting it to over 9000. Nice job Pedro! :) At least Feature requests is still at 4163.

After reading it I am not sure if Pedro is being sarcastic towards Fencer or is taking Fencer's side about the percentage of morons and miscreants on this site. With the count at zero, perhaps I will begin to read the board again, but I'm not planning on it. The linked thread is over 1½ years old.

Pedro Martínez: What conversation is this?

pgt: i just wouldn't care... if someone is so sick to play against himself, only to get to the first rate, he's just wretched. so who cares about people that wastes their own time... i just wouldn't give a sh... about this player :-)

Thom27: The bug is repaired.
I beg to differ.

paully: Fencer should remove him.
Give him a break. It is his site and he can do whatever he wants with it. And he has more important things to do.
http://brainking.com/cz/Board?bc=1&plla=1127525

Pedro Martínez: This bug is repaired, but not the following: if one submits a move in backgammon and goes directly to the next backgammon game, the probability to get the same roll again as in the previous game seems to be higher than it should be.

No progress yet.Over to you Fencer?

Has there been any progress as regards the bug where the first two rolls are identical? I seem to have been noticing this happening again…

Aganju: i'm pretty sure i did more then twice at crowded BG and some of my opponents too...if you like wide walls you should maybe try out cloning backgammon :-)

I didn't manage to make the 10-prime, but anyone had a 9-prime before?
Crowded Backgammon (Rainbow Days vs. Aganju)

This is why if I ever create another tournament, I will most definitely make sure it is timed using the Fischer Clock.

furbster: Thanks for that. All the games have now disappeared, and my BG rating has dropped about 100 points, But I won't have to worry whether I'll live to see the tournament conclusion

pgt: you dont have to wait for them you sholuld eb able to reign every game even if its their turn

playBunny: I can only resign them one game at a time. So I need each player to play at least 4 or 5 moves (for a Backgammon each move) before the game disappears. At 5 days per move that will take about a month.

pgt: I've got two of the slowest players. My other two opponents gave up one and two years ago respectively. What a travesty.

pgt: I don't understand the problem. If you look at the tourney, you're in a group with 4 others so you have 8 matches, no more. Resign them all and you'll be done playing it. You won't be able to join another tournament for the next decade, what with whikki and Somelaughs2 being in the same group, but that's a different problem. ;-)

The next round has started! How do I get out of it? I have 8 of my allowable 20 games (I was a paying member when I joined this tournament 7 years ago, and promised to pay again when a decent autopass system was introduced, but Fencer is not interested) I am currently just resigning each time I get a game to play in this tournament, but given past experience, even that could take a few months!

Czuch: If cardinal wins both of his remaining games, you, cardinal and furbuster would move on, If cardinal looses one game, furbuster moves on alone

playBunny: I wonder if I paid for a lifetime membership it would pass to my heirs to complete tournaments? An interesting thought.
I checked the mortality tables, and I now think I have enough time for one-and a half rounds more, provided the first round fo the tournamnet finishes by the end of 2014.

pgt: I'm through to the next round, but I'll be over 80 when it finishes, and there's no guarantee that I'll still have all my marbles my then. I think I'll just resign all the games and get on with real life.

Lol. Let's hope not! But surely you can pass the baton on to some youngster and have them save your honour? Perhaps grenv? ... or his grandchildren? ;o)

Czuch: You've given a link to your mailbox. ;o)

In the tournament that you're referring to, The first doubling cube tournament, it's hard to predict final scores without checking each unfinished game but furbster's win against you will gain him 4 S.B. points from your wins, which makes it likely that he'll beat your S.B. score.

Czuch: BTW.... this one was started almost 71/2 years ago as well!

Assuming it ends as a tie between myself and Furbster, who will be crowned number 1?

http://brainking.com/en/ReadEvent?evid=3042806

happyjuggler0: "Only 7 1/2 years for round one? That is awesome! It is also why I won't play a backgammon tournament here. Ever."

If you did play one, and got some of the "dirty dozen", it would be the only one that you would ever play. My one tournament, WASSAIL, has only recently started its second round, a comparatively zippy six years on. There are many dead accounts in that one, too.

wetware: "It's pretty bad when you need both a match equity table and a mortality table to compute your match winning chances."

Lol! :-)

pgt: you wont let the youngsters win would you ? it will just give them something to brag about ... you should know them the real power of age!