Read this before you go on this site as an experienced 'beginner'!

[MrBeardy]

Someone's beginner status is not self defined it just means they haven't played the game before on bga. I think there's an option to play in training mode if you want to teach beginners without impacting elo. Best not to get too focused/obsessed with elo though. Life's too short

[Meeplelowda]

can you not both agree to quit the game with no ELO loss? With a promise to play once your ELO won't be sacked by a loss?

Yes, of course this is a possibility, if the other person agrees to quit. Some people would not have a problem with quitting, some would.

The other part of OP's post was about feeling sandbagged because they assumed instead of just asking before the game starts. If they know they are actually experienced they won't 'go easy' on them and be ambushed?

Yes, the friendly conversation you propose does take care of the mismatched expectations.

[Meeplelowda]

Best not to get too focused/obsessed with elo though. Life's too short

Very true, but some people take it very seriously. I try to see it from their perspective.

[Jellby]

I think there's an option to play in training mode if you want to teach beginners without impacting elo.

But they'll keep being a beginner until they play a ranked game, I believe.

Still, the rank doesn't say much about a player's ability (especially if it's below 100), only about their BGA playing history.

[Fletcheese]

But since I'm playing a beginner, I don't necessarily expect a really tough challenge, I may even 'go easy' on them, I'm thinking.

...I lose a ton of elo. Yes, some of you may not care about that, but its a measure of status on this site, losing it has significance, and its not a good feeling.

These two ideas are completely incongruent. If you care about ELO that much, you should never go easy on anyone. ELO assumes you are playing at your skill level every game or it will not be an accurate representation. Simple as that.

Yes it feels bad to lose to a new player who has not yet reached their "true" ELO, but this is a necessary part of the system.

[Romain672]

Feel free to goes in training mode with a new player, and do that even further.

[T72on1]

But since I'm playing a beginner, I don't necessarily expect a really tough challenge, I may even 'go easy' on them, I'm thinking.

...I lose a ton of elo. Yes, some of you may not care about that, but its a measure of status on this site, losing it has significance, and its not a good feeling.

These two ideas are completely incongruent. If you care about ELO that much, you should never go easy on anyone. ELO assumes you are playing at your skill level every game or it will not be an accurate representation. Simple as that.

Yes it feels bad to lose to a new player who has not yet reached their "true" ELO, but this is a necessary part of the system.

Agreed.

[nccc]

Most people u r talking about, don't even know that forum exists, not to mention reading this post.

[wentley]

Thanks for the contributions to the debate so far, and I get where most of them are coming from. I obviously sympathise with the people who want the elo system changed just a little, to mitigate this problem for those of us who think it is one. That has been my suggestion in the past, but in the absence of any change, I wondered if new players might think a bit before challenging all and sundry. Perhaps that is an unrealistic expectation.

I do sometimes try to have the 'friendly conversation'. However some of you may be surprised to know that occasionally people do not respond to your friendly overtures, and may even quit! (Fright, embarrassment, boredom? I'm not sure which. Maybe they had another game on, and it was a coincidence). And there may be circumstances, such as when other people are waiting for you to start, that you deem it politic to begin the game without further ado.

I understand also the viewpoint of those who consider it my problem, even if that might seem a tad like 'victim-blaming'. I suppose I can only say this is the way I feel about it, but not everyone will agree.

[arisanana]

Just to add my two cents: I play enough games where ELO is either very fluid ... or sub-accounts/smurf accounts abound.

Starting with the former, for example, luck-based games. Sure, actual skill and reading the flow of the game (and for some, luck in itself) can be considered factors that should affect defined skill to improve rating. But sometimes, no matter how good you can guess with your luck, it doesn't turn out that way. It's rare to see master-rated players in such games, let's say King of Tokyo, for example, or even better, Can't Stop, a game basically 1000% luck-based. As such, it's obviously very possible to lose enough to drop back to 100 pts, the threshold between beginner and apprentice, when you can be pretty strong at the game.

Luck aside, sub-accounts and smurfs are VERY much a thing from what I can tell. If nothing else, Hanabi should say it all
Personally, I've met plenty of people who are fresh out of the oven with 100 pts and literally already know avalanche/black (the standard "upper level" variants), and plenty of those are smurf or new accounts. Some of them are even obviously antagonistic (blocked, RT'd, and reported, ofc) and claim they were over 1000 pts before blah blah. Whatever the case, I know there's more than plenty of low level folks who actually know their stuff, and operate as such. Of course, there's always actual beginners mixed in, who haven't practiced via training mode, and it's not like I can personally tell who is which. I used to make Hanabi rooms open to everyone, even "Beginners", until it became a little too tiring to ask if they were familiar (to Hanabi and/or variants) or not and wanted to learn. Now, I deal with things by making rooms open to Apprentice or higher, assuming that everyone who accepts to start the game knows the basics and probably the variants. I get a lot less people who *don't* know even the basics and a *whole lot more* who I give hints to with the assumption they know things like "this 5 on the left right at the start means play black 5". Probably less than 1 in 15, or 20 who have questions. Usually, if there is doubt they don't understand, it happens within the first several turns when someone misfires black 1 or a colored 5 :') and we clarify it then and there (if they're open to responding....some aren't, as others have said).

So in conclusion, what I have to say is, don't operate with the thought that "beginners" are anything concrete. They could be whatever for all you know. However, if a player has more than a few games and they're still at "apprentice", then maybe you can pull your punches then.

TL;DR Don't look at the rate, look at their game count vs their rate And for "beginners", especially don't assume things, because everyone was once a "beginner"...maybe you yourself practiced in training mode with friends for a long time before going out into the rated world.