Skip to content

Posts from One for all and all for one - 3

2.0 (1 rating)
Announcement
User Avatar
12 years ago
Auto-translated
Tournament standings.
In reply to Sevan_80
User Avatar
11 years ago
Auto-translated
Sevan_80
Where didn't you play with the crosses?
Match against Pyre, round 1, and against Ominous1, round 2. There wasn't a strong, stopping cross, but there wasn't a result either.
In reply to Roger DAltavilla
User Avatar
11 years ago
Auto-translated
Roger DAltavilla
Your unplayed match is being discussed by the judges. :)
Seriously? I also have games with tic-tac-toe, and Ayi has a tic-tac-toe game. Let's continue this circus we started recently and talk about who wanted to play and who didn't. Maybe you can just tell us that Bishop's team won the tournament? And we all gathered here as extras to sympathize that Diabler can no longer play? That's not fair.
In reply to Roger DAltavilla
User Avatar
11 years ago
Auto-translated
Roger DAltavilla
Match against Pyre, round 1, and against Ominous1, round 2. There wasn't a harsh, decisive cross, but there wasn't a result either.
Judging by the 1-point difference, the cross was quite enough to involve someone other than the tournament leader in discussing this issue, and (if necessary) to change the criteria that are losing their meaning.
In reply to HellLighT
User Avatar
11 years ago
Auto-translated
HellLighT
Judging by the 1-point difference, the tiebreaker was sufficient to involve someone other than the tournament leader in discussing this issue, and (if necessary) to change the criteria that are losing their meaning.
This is fair.
In reply to HellLighT
User Avatar
11 years ago
Auto-translated
In general, I believe that we didn't have any players on our team who would drag out the deadlines, which in turn extended them, not just once! No matter how much they might blame r55max, he could make tough decisions!
In reply to HellLighT
User Avatar
11 years ago
Auto-translated
HellLighT
Judging by the 1-point difference, the moderator has clearly decided to involve someone other than the tournament leader in discussing this issue, and (if necessary) to change the criteria that are losing their meaning.
Involve someone? Discuss something? Here, tournaments are won through technical skill, and no one is involved, and nothing is discussed! Although they could have easily sorted it out. Why would they suddenly start sorting things out and delving into the matter?
In reply to Lim4
User Avatar
11 years ago
Auto-translated
Lim4
No, is this normal? I also have games with tic-tac-toe, and Ayi has a tic-tac-toe game. Let's continue this circus that started recently and talk about who wanted to play and who didn't. Maybe you can just tell us that Bishop's team won the tournament? And we all gathered here as extras to sympathize that Diabler can no longer play? That's not right.
The entire problem lies with the system for counting wins; by silent agreement among the players, the third game was usually not played. Although this notorious criterion, b) the total number of wins, was supposed to encourage playing all games. The rules were known to everyone before the start of the tournament.
In reply to Roger DAltavilla
User Avatar
11 years ago
Auto-translated
Roger DAltavilla
The rules were known to everyone before the tournament began.
Is this the same set of rules that the judges recently violated (i.e., changed)?
In reply to Roger DAltavilla
User Avatar
11 years ago
Auto-translated
Roger DAltavilla
The entire issue stems from the victory point system; by unspoken agreement among the players, the third game was usually not played. Although this infamous criterion, b) the total number of victories, was supposed to encourage playing all games. The rules were known to everyone before the tournament began.
And yet, Yegor didn't play all the games against his will; no one thought that Andrey would withdraw.
P.S. Knowing the situation, the organizers could have emphasized the importance of playing all the games.
In reply to BISHOP
User Avatar
11 years ago
Auto-translated
BISHOP
+ to the previous speaker about the number of overall wins. darkello refused to finish the game with me in the 2nd round because he was sure that LuckyF would win, and he wouldn't have to play against me. As a result, I was given a loss.
That's how he won...
In reply to Dark
User Avatar
11 years ago
Auto-translated
darkello
so he won...
You didn't grasp the point. I'm writing about the fact that the number of wins has decreased for us because of your refusal to play, which, as it turns out, is taken into account in the initial rankings.
In reply to BISHOP
User Avatar
11 years ago
Auto-translated
BISHOP
You missed the point. I'm writing about the fact that the number of our wins has decreased because of your refusal to play, which, as it turns out, is taken into account in the early stages.

So, you didn't read the rules when you signed up?
In reply to BISHOP
User Avatar
11 years ago
Auto-translated
BISHOP
You didn't grasp the point. I'm writing about the fact that the number of our wins has decreased because of your refusal to play, which, as it turns out, is taken into account in the initial rankings.
Why twist things around? I'm not that much of a villain to devise such cunning plans as you describe. I simply didn't pay enough attention to finishing the game and missed that moment...
In reply to Sanin
User Avatar
11 years ago
Auto-translated
Sanin
So, you didn't read the rules when you signed up?
Yep :D, it's like the fine print in a contract.
In reply to BISHOP
User Avatar
11 years ago
Auto-translated
The funniest thing is that the previous tournament had exactly the same criteria for qualifying. It was copied exactly. Why was everyone okay with it then? :confused:

Statistics

Welcome our newest member: recijeb