|2013-01-13 02:08:19 • Michał Żukowski (zukolepl)|
|A month ago (13.12.2012) I sent a second e-mail to members of the EL Committee in this case (Drabost), in which I posted next analysis and still have not received a response. I thought, that personal culture undertakes to response, but apparently I was wrong. It's funnily, because iec wrotes I suggest if there is some suspicion, committee should be contacted directly without starting potential flamewars by public accusation. I now ask, where is response? As you can see, points of the team cicafanok has not changed, so for members of EL Committee Drabost isn't cheater. I would like to know, what was the reason for such a result. I hope, that aren't general opinion about player - problems in the past (if any), presence on live tournaments, performance in other competitions, opinion on player's reliability from trustworthy people who knows him/her personally. Second question - what is your (EL Committee) plan to detect cheaters? Another survey? :-)).|
|2013-01-12 19:00 • Alexander Bogatirev (pbayc)|
|Hi, everyone. I'll be brief.
I wanna tell about possible innovations in EL.
It is the limit of players in one team, who have no experience in live games.
Firstly, it will enable to assess the abilities of the players more better. We will compare the online level of understanding of game with their actual live performances.
Secondly, it will stimulate some players finally to take a part in live-tournaments.
I propose to introduce this rule in the EL next season.
I think committee can designate limit of 5 or 4 players who have no experience in live games.
It can be changed to 4 or 3 at EL season 2014/2015.
We can take into account renju live-tournaments too.
|2013-01-08 20:15:29 • Michał Żukowski (zukolepl)|
|"9. The duties of captains
9.1. The captain is in charge of the team.
9.2. If a captain fails to do his/her duties he/she has to transfer them to another player of the team.
9.3. The captain proposes match dates and has to confirm proposals on the site of EL.
9.4. The captain is responsible for all matters related to the match date agreement.
9.5. The captain of the 1st team (listed on the left in the ”Current round” section) has to fill in the results of the match in the “Match result” section of the EL website. The captain of the 2nd team is obliged to approve or to correct the results. It is allowed to fulfill this duty in the reverse order."
PP FOR THE TEAMS
9.4 captain doesn't follow the rules
|2013-01-08 20:03:08 • Alex Popiel (lolamaza)|
Nice to hear from you :D
We were running out of time and I had to fill in the results of LXO vs OUT, while Ilya could not do it in time and we agreed that I'd do so. Today, when I visited the site, Chrome must have used the most recent credentials and logged me in as lobromozel, which I just didn't notice and proceeded with posting my response.
I hope this helps.
|2013-01-08 19:18:52 • Adam Harmasz (dwhenry)|
RE: Re: Survey
|And one more, I asked Alex and Ilya answered;] maybe another chrome bug.|
|2013-01-08 19:12:03 • Adam Harmasz (dwhenry)|
RE: Re: Survey
|You are cap, and he is doing your stuff, it makes sense;)|
|2013-01-08 19:02:07 • Ilya Katsev (lobromozel)|
RE: Re: Survey
|No, we live in different countries :)
Alex has my credentials (on this site) to make proposal about dates of matches, because he organizes this staff.
|2013-01-08 18:24:41 • Adam Harmasz (dwhenry)|
RE: Re: Survey
|Why are you autologged as Bromozel? Bromozel and You have the same computer?;)|
|2013-01-08 16:51:31 • Alex Popiel (lolamaza)|
RE: Re: Survey
|Sorry, Chrome mixed up my autologin settings, choosing the wrong account. This message was intended from me.|
|2013-01-08 16:43:38 • Ilya Katsev (lobromozel)|
|I think some of the mentioned players deserve a lot more attention than me -- due to the history of their performance and even their overt confessions.
However, if I am to respond to the questions that I am being directly asked by Bano, my answers are as follows:
1. No, during the matches I do not refer to means described in rules 11.5, 11.6, nor any other means to be helpful immediately or in the course of the games.
2. Not that I know of. What I know fo sure is that my teammates systematically prepare, practice, and analyze a wide spectrum of gomoku positions. All the opponents, that the Lords of XO have to face in the Euroleague, are scrutinously prepared for, both with respect to which opens we expect from them and which opens and strategies can be most helpful against our current opponents.
Thanks a lot.
|2013-01-08 13:44:43 • Vladimir Nipoti (angrypanda)|
|It seems that we all know that this iniciative is based on loss of credibility of player Alex Popiel. The voting, however, is not such a bad idea. Nonetheless, I would like to ask Alex directly two questions:
1. Did you knowingly cheat or break EL rules in this or previous seasons?
2. Did any of your teammates (your team) knowingly cheat or break EL rules in this or previous seasons?
Thank you for your answers.
|2013-01-08 01:03:26 • Piotr Małowiejski (dt_angst)|
|I can only comment right now that every initiative that can help to heal situation is well seen from my side.
Maybe it's reasonable you called it childish, but maybe there is no better way at the moment, as everyone knows that it's almost impossible to find clear evidence that someone is cheater.
Frankly speaking I don't find ostracism as the best way to act, but after careful consideration such kind of survey can be helpful material for EL Committee. I understand you would like to see punished people, but it's not as easy as to have a feeling, even very strong feeling to punish anyone with no hard evidence.
I just would like to emphasize that all people who really would like to see fair competition should act together, not critisize or at least give better ideas.
We will discuss it on Committee forum and will back with our remarks. Probably during this season we need to base on usual standards, but it looks we will have hard work during summer break to find better rules.
|2013-01-07 10:00:09 • Jan Purkrábek (czpaypurkys)|
I agree with Kedlub, absolutely...
(captain of Czech Layback A)
|2013-01-07 02:08:02 • Pavel Laube (kedlub)|
|With all my respect (and I don't have much),
what is the meaning of this "questionarrie"? Isn't it a bit childish?
First of all, the methode how to chose the listed people doesn't make much sense, although it tries to appear objective. Probably nobody thinks that this is a sufficient list of possible cheaters (regards to Drabost).
But more importantly, what validity has such a voting of captains based on no presented information? I bet that at least half of them doesn't have any real knowledge about the players, at the best kind of "I've heard that somebody told.." I appretiate that you took some inspiration from Athene democracy and Ostracism, but come on..
Let's be completely honest now, by this quasi-objective list you mean to accuse concrete people. And it won't be probably Ants or Bano. So what I ask is, why don't you do this directly, without this theater? I'm a bit fed up of all this backstage speculations, including the activity of our mysterious oracle EL comittee. And I agree that the situation about cheating in our competition is serious and we should take some action. So I beg anybody who has any information or suspicion about cheating to present it openly and clearly here, on the EL forum. Only with clear and open arguments can we decide, only then can we start to discuss even things such as voting of captains.
I've recently read a discussion on the polish forum related to the Drabost case. I was shocked. At first by the fact that he wasn't found guilty with such a load of evidences, concerning the analysis of his EL games and exeptional % of "program moves" as well as his comparative live performance. But what was even more shocking for me was the fact that nobody took these arguments to EL forum and make them public. All that we could learn from EL committee was that "they will watch it".
I don't have any desire nor time to hunt the facts through the russian or polish forum, but this is serious. So I suggest that investigation of the committee in these cases should be much more open, they should present their findings and arguments which made them decide. And so should bring the arguments anybody else who has them. We lose the confidence in this competition and there is no other way how to gain it back as the open discussion.
|2013-01-06 23:25:34 • Ilya Muratov (wk_bkmz)|
|Here is the full and reviewed version of the questionnaire for the captains of the teams taking part in the current EL season.
We encourage to use "yes"/"no"/"not sure" as variants to answer these questions.
1) Do you prepare for the EL matches and if yes, how much time do you usually spend on it?
2) Do you think that the great results of the player ______ come from his excellent skills, experience, preparation for the matches and analysis of games?
3) Do you think that player _______ uses something that is forbidden and breaks the rules of online competitions?
4) Do you think that player _______ breaks the rules in other way?
5) If both assumptions are positive, can you present clear evidenceagainst player _______?
6) Do you want a temporary disqualification or any other punishment of player _______ from online competitions?
|2013-01-06 21:38:37 • Ilya Muratov (wk_bkmz)|
|This text is really important. Please, read it till the end to make your point of view.
Recently a sharp issue about credibility of certain excellent players from gomoku community and about the way they achieve their results has occurred. The specifics of online competitions do not enable to present clear evidence of guilt of one or another player. However, good results could be the product of own skills, experience and preparation for matches and not some kind cheating.
This uncertainty leads to permanent growth of tension, mistrust and rejections of participation in online competitions. To control the situation we propose to establish a periodical voting about credibility of top players. Such voting would allow the organizers to be constantly informed, know the opinion of the community, which would help them to make the right decision and to ban a player in time, if the majority expresses mistrust in him. It is essential for the reputation of the competition.
As a matter of fact, the time for such voting has come. Therefore we propose to the captains of EL teams to answer following questions about top players. The questionnaire concerns the best EL players of the season 2011-2012 and of the current season. The best 8 players from both seasons, with condition of having at least 60 games in both seasons, will be judged.
Players: Russia - Andrey Litvinenko, Alex Popiel, Yuriy Tarannikov; Hungary - Attila Hegedüs; Czech republic - Vladimir Nipoti; Poland- Bogdan Brachaczek, Piotr Bieniek; Estonia - Ants Soosyrv
1) Do you think that player _______ uses something that is forbidden and breaks the rules of online competitions?
2) Do you think that player _______ breaks the rules in other way?
3) Do you want a punishment for player _______?
4) Do you think that the great results of the player ______ come from his excellent skills, experience, preparation for the matches and analysis of games?
We recommend to perform such voting every year and, in case of agreement of the majority of the captains in first three questions, to look into disciplinary actions of a player or players.
Iliya Muratov & Alexander Bogatirev
|2012-12-04 13:17:36 • Štěpán Tesařík (czpayroxid)|
EL betting competition
|I would like to invite all of you to Euroleague betting competition for this season 2012/13.
|2012-11-28 19:53:59 • Ondrej Nykl (pandik1)|
|It's funny that writer of # 6427 post doesn't consider me a competent person just because I don't have time nor will to write long empty sentences about such an obvious case as this. Maybe this is all a joke and successful trolling of EL commitee? It would explain a lot.
As for my competency - I uncovered the first cheater in EL history, many of them throughout the years and almost all of them during last "program era" of kurnik. And I don't remember being wrong about anyone who I accused publically, even though they fought back and had defenders. And yes, lot of them were far less obious than this. But yes, I guess there are many more competent people.
Again, it's really absurd to even discuss about it, but we were told IN HUNGARY by HUNGARIAN (I won't mention the writers # because it would be quite an embarassment) that he uses a program online and he (drabos) didn't have any problems admitting it. Afterall, I think you all can check his games from TWC and if you understand gomoku at least a little bit, you should see what's going on.
|2012-11-27 19:47:40 • Paweł Tarasiński (commaestro)|
|Ondik, I know some people resign because of cheaters' attendance and completely understand it. That's why I asked questions containing clear suggestion: if Committee of EL members don't know too much about identifying cheaters, they should use experienced searchers' methods instead of their imaginations about unfair playing.
Angst, I agree that every evidences we consider give us only probability, not complete certainty. However diminishing significance of game analysis is wrong solution. For me - and probably for every person, who knows a bit more about finding cheaters - this is the most important hint. I value its importance during judging process at 90%-99%. Other factors are of little importance.
I'm glad you admit you're not expert. Now it's time for draw a conclusion. Too strong belief in friendly atmosphere means naivety, which is insolently abused by cheaters. Of course looking for them it's not your main duty, although you decide about finding guilty or not.
Gergo, it isn't necessary to convince me about work in Committee of EL as devoting free time, beacuse I was or I'm ivolved in many activies connected with gomoku too and appreciate every kind of action in favour of our environment. Declaration of accepting external aid seems positive forecast. Summarising, I would give one, basic advice: judging player accused of using program should base on different elements of game analysis: percentage, playing style, key moves' convergence, sometimes also strategies in overlines' threats or schema openings.
|2012-11-27 02:13:17 • Gergő Tóth (ycgergo)|
|Thanks for valuable comment, Pawel. I'd like to answer your 2 last questions only:
1) Of course there is no such a form, it may include renlib analysis, written material of suspicious moments or a revealing conversation, analysis of video-recorded games etc. The evidence can contain just a few games or even moves or a series of games of more seasons (like never missing a single win, play in the same pace or playing deliberately weaker under time pressure etc.). The evidence must be clear and consistent.
2) As Piotrek mentioned, we devote our free time to make things work a bit smoother. Although we make our best to find cheaters and keep the league clear, the online system will never give you 100% evidences about unfair players. We will never be able to prove if someone used some extra material (program, database, board etc.) but we always have to try to keep playing clear. From this aspect we accept anybody's help in connection with future accusations. According to your comment we might consider you as a competent person in this question, not like the writer of #6424 comment.
|2012-11-27 01:17:42 • Piotr Małowiejski (dt_angst)|
|Here are my responses:
Ad. 1) In my opinion there is no satisfactory evidence (especially just game analysis), probably only video recording or written confession would be enough. Obviously, life is not easy, so we need to decide on material received in particular case.
Ad. 2) I don't consider myself as competent in the field of finding cheaters. If I would, I probably should work for FBI or other organisation. I recommend you to read EL Rules once again. Our main role is to decide in serious cases, not looking for cheaters. We trust this is serious competition, but still we would like to see more friendly atmosphere here. We need to decide basing on our knowledge and using common sense.
Am I competent member of the Committee? I wouldn't like to judge myself. I can only add that my colleagues from the Committee are devoting their free time for you to make the things working. From your perspective we are probably making many mistakes, but there is never ill will.
|2012-11-26 23:19:37 • Ondrej Nykl (pandik1)|
|LOL, you can't be serious. He will even admit it himself that he's cheating :D
Ask yourself next year why less and less players are participating in EL.
|2012-11-26 18:05:42 • Paweł Tarasiński (commaestro)|
|Being guided by general opinion about player on this stage of proceedings I consider as unjust and unreasonable. Everyone should be equal before the law. We can take into account opinions in final stage by analogy to administration of justice: if the defendant is found guilty, he may by punished lenient e.g. for the sake of knowing him, not being recidivist etc. Before judgement the defendant should be unknown for us.
Blinking during games - in contrast to percentage of identical moves - means nothing. Nowadays only these cheaters, who are right idiots, don't use program for not blinking. I suppose, that there is no cheaters-fools among EL players.
Next issue: time consuming for making moves. Playing very fast, especially making the hardest, deciding moves, immediately, may be important clue. Unfortunately, this rule don't work inversely. Playing slower, using longer time breaks, we can not recognize as guarantee of honesty. This can be misleading or lags.
Finally, I want ask Committee of EL members:
1) How should look like satisfactory evidence(s) to determine a cheater?
2) Do you consider yourselves as competent in the field of finding cheaters?
|2012-11-25 20:45:57 • Piotr Małowiejski (dt_angst)|
The Committee decides according to the EL Rules. As there is no precise information how to proceed in such a case there is a standard voting procedure.
I am sure you understand there can't be exact % to be supposed as satisfactory to determine a cheater. No-one from The Committee considered received material as sufficient to punish Drabost.
My personal opinion is that % of identical moves is not the only one and most important factor while making such a decision.
I would take into consideration also:
- general opinion about player - problems in the past (if any), presence on live tournaments, performance in other competitions, opinion on player's reliability from trustworthy people who knows him/her personally
- behaviour during the games - blinking or not, time consumed and distance between moves (if there was trustworthy witness during the games)
- games analysis - number of moves identical with program, however taking into consideration if the moves were the same in the beginning of games, how the situation looks in not sure positions and in the obvious situations, if there were suspicious moves (like eg. in a case of overlines).
Summarising, I can imagine situation, where 50% of identical moves can be enough and on the other hand sometimes 80% is not sufficient. Obviously, the highest %, the more suspicious we should be.
|2012-11-22 12:48:54 • Andrey Sviridov (cr_spartak)|
|In my personal opinion such percantage does not exist. Prooving smb is cheating is really hard. Each case is different and shood be thoroughly analysied.|
|2012-11-21 20:32:20 • Vladimir Nipoti (angrypanda)|
|I would like to ask the committee.
How many % of moves identical to the program are supposed to be a satisfactory proof to determine a cheater?
|2012-11-19 18:10:01 • Igor Eged (ancientdragon)|
For team Renegades
|In case it proves bappka is the same player as bashibyzyk, consequences will be taken leading to future penalty points and game points loss as it would qualify as an abuse of several points in our rules.
So I suggest to consider possible comeback with the same real name, change of kurnik nickname if it won't be available anymore could be discussed.
|2012-11-19 18:03:31 • Igor Eged (ancientdragon)|
|I suggest if there is some suspicion, committee should be contacted directly without starting potential flamewars by public accusation.
In this case committee didn't find the evidence sufficient, but will watch closely in next rounds, thanks for analysis Michal.
|2012-11-12 02:21:25 • Michał Żukowski (zukolepl)|
|Player Drabos Tamas (EL nick - drabost from team Cicafanok) plays with program.
In the evening CET will send renlib with his games against Czech Layback and Renegades.
|2012-10-30 20:08:18 • Tomo Dernovšek (jezek_si)|
|rule 8.1: " ... A captain can accept new player during every EVEN round, ..."
even means 2nd, 4th, 6th and 8th round