multple account

[Matme1987]

Hello everyone,


Last week I was reported to the moderation for telling my partner that her way of playing was very stupid...that's not the problem, it allowed me to discover the different reasons for reporting and I was particularly struck by one criterion: ‘having several accounts to increase your ELO’...


I only play with this account but almost all highly ranked players have several accounts to try to limit the loss of points in the event of defeat, it also allows you to switch depending on the partner and/or opponents...


In fact, you know my radical position on the ELO (for me, it's useless and meaningless because of, among other things, multiple accounts) but how is it that almost all good players are not worried by anyone?


Either it's the same rule for everyone or everyone does as they please, but when the penalty doesn't apply to everyone in the same way, that's problematic... In fact, some accounts have been penalised while others can have up to 4 or 5 accounts without any problems.


Don't worry, I'm not going to report anyone - that's not my style. I'm just wondering about the fairness of moderation decisions regarding multiple accounts.

[--Q--]

That report option is only for the case that a person plays against himself with another account to boost ELO. Having several accounts that don't interfere seems fine.

You shouldn't blame the players but the current ELO systems. If you fave two 500 players as a 500 player with a 100 partner, your win probability is somewhere around 20%. If you lose, you lose a lot of ELO. If you win, you probably get awarded 0 ELO because you lose all your ELO to your partner who "drew" to a 500 player, while you lose a lot of ELO for "drawing" a 100 ELO player. So first of all, you take a big handicap by playing with a weak partner and second, you get heavily punished elowise because the system doesn't make sense.

Don't blame the players avoiding this ELO-trap, blame BGA for not caring.

[Matme1987]

I don't blame anyone. I'm just saying:


- ELO is useless and in no way an indicator of skill at this game. I'll say it again: this ELO means nothing because winning at tichu depends on the cards, the level of your partner and also the level of your opponents.

- I can't understand the point of using multiple accounts to preserve something as anecdotal as such a shaky indicator of level.


For me, ELO would make sense for chess, draughts and go. The rest is folklore... Yams' ELO is almost as relevant as tichu's.

[--Q--]

Reducing success at tichu to the cards that are dealt is a very naive approach to the game, also a sign that the path at this game is still at the beginning.

[Matme1987]

I didn't say that: the cards, your partner's skills and your opponent's skills are the 3 conditions for winning at Tichu.

As proof, many highly-ranked players only play as a fixed team so that they can control the partner's skill parameters... so their victory only depends on the cards and the level of their opponents... if the opponents are equal, it's just a question of the cards...

READ ME PLEASE

[Jellby]

The moderators will only act (if they do) on players who are reported. So if you don't report players who you think are cheating, don't complain that nothing is done against them.

[Matme1987]

Once again I've been misread...


My basic message was: I know people who have been moderated for having multiple accounts... while others have a multitude of accounts without being bothered...


I was just asking where the consistency was... either we punish all multi-accounts or we punish no-one...


After that, I'm in favour of over-pressuring the ELO, which would solve a lot of problems here (games left by losers, etc.). If you want competition, play in an arena with a random team, but access to the arena should be limited to a number of games or a percentage of victory to have balanced teams

[Jellby]

Have those "other" multi-accounts been reported? If they haven't, they won't be moderated. If they have, perhaps different moderators have different opinions, or the evidence presented was of different strength/quality.

[tichufan986]

We are not trying to blame but let’s call a spade a spade when we see it. Moderators do make mistakes.

It is definitely possible in some cases that moderators made a mistake - and despite the in-depth reasoning or appeal of strong players rated 300+, they still stick to their decision.