RPS Ladder Tournament!

[martinburley]

And the biggie:

5. You can challenge either of the players 1 or 2 places above you.

For example, if the ladder is:

1 = Bob
2 = Cob
3 = Dob
4 = Fob
5 = Gob

then Gob can challenge Fob and Dob (but not Cob or Bob), Fob can challenge Dob or Cob (but not Bob), Cob can challenge Bob or Dob, etc...

This is contradictory, Martin.  There is no provision in the rules for higher-ranked players to challenge lower-ranked players.  Indeed, the rules explicitly state that players may only challenge players 1 or 2 ranks above them (not below them.)  However, your example shows Cob challenging Dob, a lower ranked player.  Nothing in the written rules allows for this.

That was a typo, an error made in the process of replacing the preliminary rules with the full and finalised rules. I've modified the posted rules accordingly.

I note that the other players were confused, since they'd been in the tournament long enough to remember the old (correct) version of the rules. I apologise if latecomers like yourself got a little confused. Well done for asking for help.

Please note, by the way, that since leaving out the phrase '...or below...' was a typo, inserting it does not change the rules. If you have any doubts about this, you're welcome to visit the Strategic Forces Department to check the official rules parchment (sealed in a locked box in the vault) against the rules now published here. I assure you you'll find the written and Bullboard versions match perfectly.

Now, this means custardchuk's challenge against me is indeed a valid challenge. Your challenge against me is therefore postponed until my match against custardchuk is completed.

(Incidentally, the fact that players can challenge players below them as well as above them, combined with the fact that beating a lower-ranked player lifts you 1 place higher, counters another objection you might have considered making, because it reduces the temptation for players at the top of the ladder to slowplay their matches. For example, if player 1 is slowplaying in a match against player 2, player 2 can nevertheless jump above player 1 if he or she successfully defends against a challenge from another player. Or if player 1 is slowplaying against player 3, player 2 can jump into first place by challenging and beating player 3 or player 4.)

[martinburley]

Another question for you, Martin.  Under your tournament rules:

5. You can challenge either of the players 1 or 2 places above you.

10. You cannot refuse a valid challenge.

13. You can claim victory by forfeit if your opponent takes more than a week to make a throw

11. If you are challenged by two other players, the second challenger's challenge is postponed until the first match is completed.

Let's go back to our good friends Bob, Cob and Dob.  Bob is still #1, Cob is still #2 and Dob is still #3.

Dob wants to advance in the ladder... Dob challenges Bob.  Cob also challenges Bob, since there is no one else to challenge.

Bob accepts Dob's challenge.  According to rule #11, Cob's challenge against Bob is postponed until the completion of Dob's challenge against Bob.

However, rule #13 states that a player may claim victory by forfeit if the challenged player "takes more than a week to make a throw."

A challenge is not a throw.  These are two totally separate concepts.  The fact that the "challenge" between Bob and Cob is delayed, does not remove the fact that Bob must deliver a "throw" within one week of being challenged, or forfeit the match.

Therefore, according to your own rules, Martin, Cob may claim victory by forfeit over Bob if Bob's match against Dob takes more than a week.  There is no other provision in your rules for what happens when a player makes a challenge that is postponed for more than a week due to the challenged player already being involved in a match.  Bob loses by forfeit through no fault of his own, especially if Cob is jockeying for the #1 spot and is intentionally stalling the match.

This quibble is easily dismissed. Rosh, you say,

However, rule #13 states that a player may claim victory by forfeit if the challenged player "takes more than a week to make a throw."

I suggest you read the rules more carefully. The rules say:

13. You can claim victory by forfeit if your opponent takes more than a week to make a throw

This is the point: since Cob's challenge against Bob is postponed until after Dob's challenge match against Bob is completed, Cob is not yet Bob's opponent. Bob may be many things to Cob - friend, nemesis, Master, student, drinking buddy, even opponent-to-be, but until the postponed challenge becomes live, Bob is not Cob's opponent, and therefore the forfeit rule does not apply.

Your argument is akin to claiming you can divorce your girlfriend if she sleeps with another guy. Not if you're not yet married, you can't.

If you are still unsure about this, or any other aspect of the rules, I'm happy to send you a list of adult literacy classes in your area in case you might find that useful. There's no shame in asking for help.

[martinburley]

Ladder Update

Current Ladder Standings (after 1 match completed)

1. C Urbanus
2. Franklint
3. R Cohrs
4. Maxamillion
5. custardchuk
6. martinburley
7. ScissorSista
8. Master Roshambollah

Matches Being Played

martinburley vs Maxamillion
Maxamillion vs R Cohrs
custardchuk vs martinburley

Completed Matches

Franklint 2-4 C Urbanus

(Note: In all matches and match results, the challenger is listed first.)

[C. Urbanus]

I look forward to participating in this much-anticipated and well-run tournament.

Geez, that sounds like an e-mail that could/has been written to a certain Commissioner of another group.

[Master Roshambollah]

A typo?  Really?

You can't explain away a poorly run tournament by claiming "it's a typo".  Honestly, I don't think it even occurred to you to include challenges both up and down the ladder (even after chuk made an illegal challenge and you accepted.) 

None of the other players seem to be confused.  All of the challenges were made in accordance with the original rules of the tournament (before you modified them) with players able only to challenge higher ranked players.

Don't you think your "rule modification" changes the whole dynamic of the tournament?  Wouldn't you consider it unfair to your players since your "rule modification" took place after all the other players had already delivered a throw?  Don't you think it's strange that the only match breaking the original rules of the tournament is between you and custardchuk?

I don't want to get into a semantic argument with you (Lord knows) but I'm having a hard time resolving your statement "all the rules are now finalized" with "I've modified the posted rules."

From this I understand that the "tournament rules" and the "posted rules" are two separate entities.  How many more changes should your players expect, Martin?  You can claim all day that you are the only individual with possession of the True Inalterable Rules of the Tourney, and dole out bits and pieces of it as the mood suits you, but that's no way to run a fair tournament.

By way of example as to how this changes everything, before entering the tourney I noted that the lowest ranked player on the ladder could not legally be challenged by anyone.  For this reason I entered the tournament and made sure I was positioned on the lowest rung.  Why?  Let's just say you'll understand when you have a little International experience.

The least you could have done was warn your players ahead of time that you would be "constituting a course hazard" in the tourney yourself, changes the rules, attempting to influence the outcome, etc.  I did this with the 2008 MotBB and it worked pretty smoothly (except for a couple of amateur malcontents with more time on their hands than sense.)

Just a thought.

[martinburley]

I don't want to get into a semantic argument with you (Lord knows) but I'm having a hard time resolving your statement "all the rules are now finalized" with "I've modified the posted rules."

Feel free to read that line as "I've corrected the typo" if it makes you feel better.

From this I understand that the "tournament rules" and the "posted rules" are two separate entities.  How many more changes should your players expect, Martin?  You can claim all day that you are the only individual with possession of the True Inalterable Rules of the Tourney, and dole out bits and pieces of it as the mood suits you, but that's no way to run a fair tournament.

I just stated that the rules on the website now match the written master copy perfectly. From that statement, you can clearly infer that the rules cannot now change, since then they would not match the written master copy. Even if you don't believe I have a written master copy, the fact that I invoked it means I can't wriggle out of that logical argument. So no one need worry about any more rule changes.

The least you could have done was warn your players ahead of time that you would be "constituting a course hazard" in the tourney yourself, changes the rules, attempting to influence the outcome, etc.  I did this with the 2008 MotBB and it worked pretty smoothly (except for a couple of amateur malcontents with more time on their hands than sense.)

While the 2008 MotBB worked out well in the end, it was more by luck than by good administration. This ladder tournament is going to set the standard far higher for competent, effective administration.

[martinburley]

Prizes

Here are the details of the awards in the RPS Ladder Tournament.

Titles are awarded quarterly, on March 21, June 21, September 21, and December 21. The first titles will be awarded on June 21.

The titles are:

Season Champion

Awarded to the player finishing at the top of the ladder for that season. Time your run well!

King of the Ladder or Queen of the Ladder

Awarded on a points basis, to the player spending most time at the top of the ladder in that season. (Winning a match to take you into 1st place earns you 1 point; winning a match when you are in 1st place earns you 1 point. Urbanus currently has 1 point.)

Skull-Crusher

Awarded to the player (if any) who achieves the highest number of 4-0 victories in that season.

Winners of each of these titles will receive a prize. What the prizes themselves are, you'll just have to wait and see.

Other titles may and likely will be awarded at the jury's discretion. However the above titles carry the greatest honour.

[Master Roshambollah]

This is the point: since Cob's challenge against Bob is postponed until after Dob's challenge match against Bob is completed, Cob is not yet Bob's opponent. Bob may be many things to Cob - friend, nemesis, Master, student, drinking buddy, even opponent-to-be, but until the postponed challenge becomes live, Bob is not Cob's opponent, and therefore the forfeit rule does not apply.

Really?  That's not how I read it. 

To make a challenge, first, announce your challenge by posting to this thread.
Then, you can immediately begin the match by sending a challenge via rpsgame.

So, as soon as the challenge is sent, the match has begun.  Even if the challenge itself is postponed due to previous play, the match itself has already started. True, there may be multiple challenges pending against one opponent, but I assume you're keeping track of all that (speaking of which, how many challenges are there pending between the conclusion of chuk's illegal challenge against you and the conclusion of my challenge against you?  As a player, I don't feel it's my responsibility to keep track of that sort of thing.)  I suppose we'll let this whole issue slide for now.

While I'm thinking about it, what would happen now if you were to respond to my challenge (perhaps absent-mindedly, perhaps maliciously) before concluding your match with custardchuk?  Since my challenge has been postponed, then my throw (as I read the rules) would be null and void.  But you would have gained valuable insight into my strategy, at no disadvantage.

On the other hand, what if you don't respond to my throw?  If your match against custardchuk lasts longer than one week (which is likely) rpsgame.com itself will cancel my challenge.  In your rules, you made provision for multiple challenges being made against the same player (Cob and Dob can both challenge Bob.)  But if Cob's match vs Dob lasts longer than a week, rpsgame will cancel Dob's challenge vs Bob.  At the end of the week, Dob will recieve a message that Bob has not responded, and the match has been cancelled.

Why should the burden then be on Dob to make sure that his challenge gets through?  If I have made a challenge in a timely manner, I don't feel that I should have to deliver a challenge more than once.  Besides, consider the following: 

Cob and Dob challenge Bob on Monday.  Cob's match comes first. 
Fob (due to ladder shifts) challenges Bob on Wednesday.
On Monday, Dob's challenge vs Cob expires on rpsgame.
On Tuesday, Bob beats Dob (finally, way to go, Bob.)

At the conclusion of the match, Fob is the only player with an active challenge on rpsgame against Bob.  Even though Dob submitted his challenge first by the rules of your tournament, he has effectively been leapfrogged by Fob.

It should come as no surprise that you and I are currently involved in a situation analagous to Fob and Bob respectively.  Martin, I tell you as a friend, your players are going to get tired of your bending the tournament rules to suit your own advancement.

Feel free to read that line as "I've corrected the typo" if it makes you feel better.

Modified?  Corrected?  Sanitized?  Altered to fit your whim?

I just stated that the rules on the website now match the written master copy perfectly.

So now in addition to occultism we're being asked to accept Neo-Platonic Idealism?

So no one need worry about any more rule changes.

Gotcha.  And thank you.  The two rule changes you've made thus far are quite enough, thank you.

King of the Ladder or Queen of the Ladder

Awarded on a points basis, to the player spending most time at the top of the ladder in that season. (Winning a match to take you into 1st place earns you 1 point; winning a match when you are in 1st place earns you 1 point. Urbanus currently has 1 point.)

Inconsistent.  Number of matches won getting to/while in first will not have any relation to which player "spent the most time" at #1.  Consider:  Bob likes being in #1, so he stalls his matches as long as possible, one week for every throw.  At the end of the season, he will have played the least number of matches at #1, but will have spent the most time at #1.  If I were Urbanus, I'd be stalling this way right now.

However, if Bob gets ousted by Cob and Dob, then Cob and Dob can form a two-player team at the #1 and #2 position.  They can trade quick matches against each other, while stalling matches as long as possible against other players.  At the end of the season, one or the other will have made the most number of points, but neither may have spent the  most time at #1.  For that matter, two or three player teams could form at any ladder position, exchanging throws quickly against other team members and dragging out matches vs other players.

I'm just trying to do you a favor, Martin.  Given enough time, all of these things will happen.  It would be a shame to see a newcomer's enthusiasm for RPS wane due to an online simulation that encourages stalling tactics over active play.

[martinburley]

Rosh, stop quibbling. You're not going to get me to bend the rules to suit your whims.

I've created a separate topic, RPS Ladder Tournament Current Standings, purely for showing the current ladder, the current challenges, and the completed matches. That should make it easy for players to see who is currently under challenge.

If players check there, as they should, and see that the player they want to challenge is already under challenge, and choose to challenge that player anyhow, they know that their challenge is postponed until that match is completed. And since the challenge must logically come before the match, if the challenge itself is postponed, so too must the match be. So they should not send the starting throw until the challenge becomes live.

If they do mistakenly send a throw too soon, the challenged opponent can simply treat it as a friendly throw and respond to it, the result not counting towards the match. As you correctly note, this gives the challenged player an extra insight into the challenger's tactics. So the challenger will be unlikely to make the same mistake with his later challenges. Punishment is a useful way to encourage swift learning of the rules.

King of the Ladder or Queen of the Ladder

Awarded on a points basis, to the player spending most time at the top of the ladder in that season. (Winning a match to take you into 1st place earns you 1 point; winning a match when you are in 1st place earns you 1 point. Urbanus currently has 1 point.)

Inconsistent.  Number of matches won getting to/while in first will not have any relation to which player "spent the most time" at #1.  Consider:  Bob likes being in #1, so he stalls his matches as long as possible, one week for every throw.  At the end of the season, he will have played the least number of matches at #1, but will have spent the most time at #1.  If I were Urbanus, I'd be stalling this way right now.

It's clear, from the scoring system, that 'time' in the first sentence refers to 'ladder time', rather than clock time. Your ladder time progresses at the rate of 1 click per match you play. (Yes, this means that ladder time passes more swiftly for players who play more matches per week than other players, but that's perfectly in accordance with special relativity, since those players are acting more speedily and therefore have greater momentum.)

However, if Bob gets ousted by Cob and Dob, then Cob and Dob can form a two-player team at the #1 and #2 position.  They can trade quick matches against each other, while stalling matches as long as possible against other players.  At the end of the season, one or the other will have made the most number of points, but neither may have spent the  most time at #1.  For that matter, two or three player teams could form at any ladder position, exchanging throws quickly against other team members and dragging out matches vs other players.

Yes, this scoring system rewards quick play to some extent. That's deliberate - it's an advantage to all players if players play matches quickly. The fact that time at the top is counted in terms of ladder time rather than clock time removes much of the temptation to slow-play - there's no advantage to staying at the top 1 more day, only to staying at the top for 1 more match.

Remember, also, that any other player can gain first place without challenging either Cob or Dob (by beating lower-ranked players, and rising 1 place with each win). Remember, further, that two players cannot trade a series of matches against each other, since if you lose a challenge, you cannot challenge the same player again until you have challenged someone else. This means they can play at most 2 matches against each other before having to play other players.

I'm just trying to do you a favor, Martin.

Do me a favour, Rosh.

It would be a shame to see a newcomer's enthusiasm for RPS wane due to an online simulation that encourages stalling tactics over active play.

It would be a shame to see an online RPS tournament hijacked by a latecomer who feels the need to question every aspect of the tournament out of a mix of paranoia, his tendency to project his own ulterior motives onto others, and his lack of confidence in his own somewhat rusty abilities making him doubt whether he will be able to let his match results do the talking for him.

[Master Roshambollah]

Not at all, Martin.  No need to get personal.  You wouldn't see real tournament organizers doing that (folks like C. Urbanus, Doug and Graham Walker and Naomi Brilliant.)

Don't blame me if your tourney rules are full of holes.  This thing is going to be a nightmare to administrate.

Thanks for your PM concerning my standing challenge to you.  In the interest of general respect, I'm keeping the contents of your message private.  In the interest of transparency, I'm making my response public.

Just this one more thing and I'll leave you alone.

As I understand things, after the conclusion of your match against custardchuk, I am the next player in line for a challenge vs you.  Correct?  Since the rules allow for one "live" match and multiple "postponed" matches, I assume this is the case.  You are two spots ahead of me, which makes my challenge valid. 

It would be easiest for me as a player for you to not respond to the challenge I sent via rpsgame, but I want to make sure that my challenge in this forum still stands, and that my place in line hasn't been jumped.

My thanks, and continued best wishes for handling this thing without having a nervous breakdown.

[Master Roshambollah]

Martin -

One more thing.  I swear this time.

Thanks for making a "postponed matches" column over in the other forum.  I was overjoyed to see my challenge against you listed first there.  Good luck and sound strategy to you.

Just to clarify, what is the time allowance for my sending a throw via rpsgame after the conclusion of your match with custardchuk?  I can't promise I will send it instantaneously, but I'll attempt to do so in a timely fashion.  I just think it's a good idea for all concerned if this matter is settled now, before it's a problem.  Whaddaya think...a week?

[martinburley]

This thing is going to be a nightmare to administrate.

Well, I expected a few teething problems, but it's no Terminal 5. Once players have got a match or two under their belts, I think it should be fairly smooth going.

As I understand things, after the conclusion of your match against custardchuk, I am the next player in line for a challenge vs you.  Correct?  Since the rules allow for one "live" match and multiple "postponed" matches, I assume this is the case.  You are two spots ahead of me, which makes my challenge valid.

It would be easiest for me as a player for you to not respond to the challenge I sent via rpsgame, but I want to make sure that my challenge in this forum still stands, and that my place in line hasn't been jumped.

Challenges are based on rankings when the challenge is announced, so your challenge was and is valid, whatever the results of my match with custardchuk. You are next off the rank against me. (You can see your pending challenge, along with any others - none at the moment - listed on the Current Standings page.)

I'm happy to let your rpsgame challenge lapse, since you weren't clear about the rules at the time you sent it. Feel free to send a new challenge as soon as my match with custardchuk finishes.

My thanks, and continued best wishes for handling this thing without having a nervous breakdown.

You're welcome. Thanks for helping clarify some important issues around the rules and tournament structure. I'll do my best not to have a nervous breakdown, since I'm plenty insane enough already.

[martinburley]

Just to clarify, what is the time allowance for my sending a throw via rpsgame after the conclusion of your match with custardchuk?  I can't promise I will send it instantaneously, but I'll attempt to do so in a timely fashion.  I just think it's a good idea for all concerned if this matter is settled now, before it's a problem.  Whaddaya think...a week?

Yep, a week seems fair.

[Master Roshambollah]

Thank you.

[custardchuk]

Sheesh.

I think I might "chuks chukdown" on hold for a while. I couldn't handle the grief.

regards
custardchuk