Bry: Thats the luck factor! I've played chess games, tablut games, checkers games etc where I've played great all the way through, I've been confident I would win, then played a silly move and lost, or drawn.
In backgammon, a luky roll of the dice can make the difference.
The play doesn't matter, its the end result. On your main page you have wins and losses, not wins, losses and near wins!

Bry: What you call "played badly", I call "played wise".

Pedro Martínez: no, one player has nothing left in the bag - played badly and had no chance of winning it. The other player still had thousands to play with but fell. They had a chance of winning and had surely played a more skillful game?

Thad: Good point.

My point is, for example, on the very first run with the 250+ players, you are currently in first place with the most points, and have played it excellently (IMO). However, Eihn is still in it, with 700 points left to your "thousands". Say you go out next round due to the lowest bid, and Eihn goes out the next round after thru losing all their points - Eihn would be higher rated than you?

It sesm to me like you would be penilised for playing so well but being unlucky, but others get rated higher for playing poorly just because they stayed in a round longer.

Does that make sense? It seems to me that the highest rated Pond players will be those who stayed in the longest (due to high bets, but fell after 10+ rounds, rather than the players who skillfully tried to bet just enough to stay in for the win but were just unlucky in one round.

I happen to disagree also, Bry. You gave us an example of two players, who both who fell in the pond in 13th round but both used a different strategy. I don't understand why do you favor one of them. In these kind of games, it's not important HOW you play, the result is what is essential and what everybody is interested in looking at the final table. Same thing as in football, for example. If Arsenal drops out of the FA Cup in the first round but plays a great, attacking football, nobody cares if the 5th Division club manages to score 1 "grubby" goal in the 90th minute.

we could have some kind of doubling cube in pond games! ;)

Bry: It seems to me that the only two factors that should be used in calculating your score in a pond game should be the round in which you fall, and the number of players you beat, no? Taking in to account how well you played along the way doesn't generally figure in to a player's score in other games, so it makes sense that it wouldn't here either (imo).

ok, so expand then !!! LOL. Why?

I disagree.

mmmmmm... so there is no point you wasting your time creating a rating list for Ponds then.

blunt and to the point fencer :O)

Bry: I won't.

<Fencer - Pond Ratings.

When you do the Pond Ratings, will they take into account your position throughout the game? For example, a player may bid >1000 every round and get to round 13 out of 16 players, then run out of points, which is bad play. A different player may get to round 13 and fall in because of lowest bid but might have been skillfully placing bets for 13 rounds and been leading the board in most of the 13 rounds. How will you differentiate between the two?

sorry to all new ponds...My puter had to go to the doctor...windows wont recognize a mouse connected...they seem to think something wrong with motherboard...i will hopefully return mid next week :(

<I have a comment about the max 10 rule implemented in at least one pond.

there is no incentive to bid less than 10 since you have enough points to bid 10 every turn!! Since everyone knows this the game will be over after one turn as everyone bids 10.

If you want to limit the maximum for 16 players you would need it to be > 1333. For example max 2000 might create a good game.

just my 2c

ummm.... the first thing you should always do is check the lowest score I would think. But I haven't won one yet so what do I know?

i didnt realize at first eihter, i just happened to browse that pond when i had no games left to play

oh!! i didnt know
:(
ah well....

he had 0 points left antje :o)

Obviously, cuz it was obvious

obviously alot of people knew alesh was bidding 0!!

A Wham Bams first PRIZE TOURNAMENT!#1 takes It. Creator: No Quarter

Welcome to all,thanks for joining let's get toughter and fight against this CF b******t!

***************
does anybody know what the prize is?

is there an odor in here

showoff

I was wondering when the multiple winner tourney was going to be created

You are still posting even though you were informed you were hidden.
Some of the posts are baiting the moderators...even though its been a month since you strike 2 happend. I feel a strike 3 is not justified but you require a 1 week ban from this board from now as a strike 2.5 .


I would apreciate other users not to carry on any conversation that may be baiting Chuck in return. Thanks

Thank you Stardust you acted correctly.

Something's rotten in the state with forbidden things.

"the only list of forbidden things can be found on the User Agreement page" - Glad to hear that...

Yes, Londo came with this proposal, I am aware of it. However, the only list of forbidden things can be found on the User Agreement page.

That's what Londo told me..."It is forbidden to delete posts that somebody replied to".

Pedro Martínez: I deleted his post at the same time it was replied to. According to what you say , if someone posts inflammatory remarks ,the post should remain if someone responds to it?

Pedro Martínez: Not forbidden, only non-recommended. But there are situations which don't allow to leave some posts on boards, even if somebody already responded to them.

Stardust: How come you don't follow one of the main rules of the discussion boards? I was told by Londo, the Global Moderator, that it is forbidden to delete posts that somebody replied to.

Czuch Chuckers: Your posts have been hidden until Steve is back online.

aww my post doesn't make sense now..

the government is the servant of the people. Therefore it should let us get the bonus.

Chuck...I deleted your post as I found it offensive and it was baiting. If you have a problem with another player might I suggest you PM them instead of using this discussion board.

Sure thing.

Fencer: I did, but was worried about the "english" part...does she understand english? she has the MOST beautiful dogs i have ever seen....cant read her site but are they Bichon Frieze? (sp)...the dogs :)
please ask her for me the Size(chest) in inches and her address :)

BerniceC: I am afraid Sinay doesn't read this board, you should PM her instead :-)

congratulations to SINAY on winning my 2nd T-shirt pond :) please forward chest size in inches and your address and I will send the shirt :)
bad luck Pedro :(...you may win the easter hamper :)
thanks to all who entered in the spirit of the game :)

grenv: I repeat, I will play this pond as if it was a normal one.

Stardust:
I agree with you it's just a game.

I played by the rules as well, just not according to the description.

Pedro: If you are staying, are you bidding between 0 and 10 in the next round?

It wasn't very clear in the description, I almost missed it and bid higher, Many people don't read the description because they already know how to play the games that they are joining, It would be best if people would put the description of variations in the title, I had the same questions as Pedro and was going to ask for clarification, but since I played by the rules, I don't have to worry about that anymore

I would like to let you know that I'm not betting 0 now. In my opinion, it's Daniel Snyder's fault. It should have been mentioned in the name of the pond that the minimum bet is 1 and maximum bet is 10. "Min bet 1 Max bet 10... Who is going to be the winner?" in the pond description is NOT enough. First, as you can see, not many people read the pond description. Secondly, there are people at this site who do not speak English. And thirdly, I doubt all the people read this board and I'm 100% sure I will not be the only one of the people who didn't "abide by the rules" in the first round who will not bet 0 now. And lastly, are the players in this pond supposed to bet 1-10 nly in the first round or during the entire pond, in all the rounds? Poor job, Daniel.

I repeat, I will play this pond as if it was a normal one.

It's just a game...no need to get nasty.

and i feel fine by the way

done.