Good morning everyone,
I do not really know if anyone here knows me or not, well firstly I will say that I reported every sanbagger I have seen until 2-3 days ago in which I got bored to see that I was being called lunatic. In this post I will say what I think about sandbagging, the types of sandbagging I have seen and what I do think about that, having said that I want to encourage people to sandbag well since bad sandbaggers will get banned and not that bad ones will not. I just hope chesscube will not pay this sandbaggers for winning the crowns at this dishonest way. This is the conclusion I have get to.
First I want to say that there are two kind of sandbagging, the one done at standar games and the one done at tournament games and I am quite positive that this people are sandbagging no matter what site managers say to me. Since they say I am paranoic. At standar games sandbagging usually goes the next way. I will show it with an example. Imagine there is someone with an standar rating of 2000. This player has win and loss against 2000 people quite evenly when the cubit wager is low 20 cubits or none. Meanwhile when the cubit wager gets high, 500-1000-2000 cubits he/she wins 90-95% of the games he/she has played. From experience I would say that this is no easy task to do. Since normally when you wager high people who are 100-200 points above yourself plays against you, and winning 90-95% of the games would be seen as an anomally. From experience I will say that doing this when you wager high is nearly impossible, unless you are not the rating you show. Moreover, if you play low wagering games you will see that you get higher rating than when you play high wagering games, since when you wager high you oponent average tends to be at least your rating or 100-200 points above yourself.
Secondly, there is the sandbagging done at tournaments, a high percentage of sandbagging is done at crown winning tournaments and normally a large quantity of those is done in the daily warzone tournament in which the point handicap is enabled. Firstly I will show my point of view. I think that someone who can do/make a large winning streak against where his oponent average is near his tournament rating is sandbagging no matter what this site moderators or admins may say to me.
As an example let us say that we have a chessplayer with a tournament rating of 1800 after around 500 games played. This 1800 tournament rated player enters the daily warzone final for example and get a winning streak of around 8-10 against oponent average of 1800 or more by winning 14 games out of 15 games played. This player now has 1950 tournament rating after that. I think this is an anomally and that the 1800 was actually sandbagging or low rated when he entered the tournament, and this anomallies for me are sandbagging. Let us get a bit more statistical.
At statistic your tournament rating will be something like the limit number you get when your games tend to infinite. If you do not know about this since you still have not studied enough I will put an example later. Thus your normal will be the rating you have now, with few varies. Normal distribution in English, see more about this in the wikipedia link;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution . You need to put your rating at the maximum point of the probability function. Let me put this way, your probability to win against someone who is higher rated than you is less than the probability you have to win against people with less rating than you.
Now let me say this with an example of what happens in the daily warzone final, the rating might vary a bit but it is alike. Let me have a player whose tournament rating is 1800. As an example let us get a dice with 10 faces a decahedron (see more info here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decahedron). The dice has the same probabilities to get any number from 1 to 10. Let's put that when this 1800 rated player plays against a 1800 rated person 1-4 will be lose the game, 5-6 will be draw the game and 7-10 will be win the game.
Now let's imagine this player is facing someone who is 100 points less rated than him a 1700 his posibilities to win the game would be next, 1-3 lose the game 4 draw it and 5-10 win the game. Meanwhile, if he faces someone who is 100 points above his rating, a 1900 person his probabilities will be next, 1-6 lose the game, 7 draw it and 8-10 win the game. While if he playes someone 200 points lower than his rating, an 1600 for example it would be 1-2 lose 3 draw 4-10 win, and if he playes against a 2000 it will be 1-7 lose, 8 draw 9-10 win. And so on when your oponent rating gets 300 points lower or higher.
Now let's believe there is a daily warzone final in which there are playing 40 people 20 of those are 1800 rated 10 2000+ rated and 10 1600 or less rated. After 15 games played 6 or so 1800 people have won 14 games and lost or draw 1 game out of 15 games, where their oponent average rating is 1800 a bit more a bit less. For making it easier they have not faced each other this 6 players. This means they have faces the other 14 1800 players + 10 2000+ rated players + 10 1600 or less rated players.
After seing this, I will just tell you to take a decahedron and try getting that. I will tell that it is easier to make it with a
decahedron than doing it against your rating oponent average. Thus, take the dice with 10 faces and for all the 20 1800 rated people dice it 15 times.
If you have got 6 or more people get 14 wins out of 15 games, congrats you think like chesscube that it is something normal to happen. Now if you have got 1 or 0 people get it, 0 normally you might start to think like me that it is not possible that in every daily warzone tournament there to be 5+ people getting that. Or getting 10+ winning streak during those tournaments.
I mean let's put myself as an example I have a tournament rating of around 2250 now a bit more, sometimes a bit less, but average of 2250. For my case it would be winning 14 games out of 15 against 2250 tournament rating average, I mean it is really difficult for me to achieve that against 1900 tournament rating average I do not want to imagine if it can be done against 2250 tournament rating average.
I may be a little paranoic about this matter, but whenever I try to say to any of the moderators or admins if this can be done, they just tell me to show proves of they losing games on purpose. Well I suppose that in some cases I cannot spot easily games when they have lost on purpose although I am quite possitive that they lose rating on purpose or keep it low on purpose then to win it in the daily warzone finals. But I am just paranoic. Although what it gets done every daily warzone final goes against any statistic you may have studied whenever and makes wrong every probabilities.
Thus, I would just invite everyone into doing this and winning money from chesscube. Everyone should just keep the rating 300 points less than what they have achived with the previous id and in this new one just keep it low, then win rating in the daily warzone final and then enter other tournaments to get your rating lower again with inteligence, without standing out a lot, just lowering it bit a bit every tournament until the daily warzone final where you win rating again. This way you will sandbag without being banned nor caught. This way they will pay you every 10 days or so 100$ which is not too bad for playing in a lame way but legally for chesscube. Although you would be sandbagging in my point of view.
Regards Xabier.
PS: You may want to edit the context of the text I have writen but I believe in what I have writen. Plus if someone is able to do that every daily warzone he is sandbagging no more proofs I do need to ban him. Since this is not the case, I encourage people into doing that.
Tue Aug 09, 2011 5:11 pm 
