Subject: Re: [issue] Match History Appeals
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 11:24:52 +1000 (EST)
From: David Low <djl@ph.adfa.edu.au>
To: fkusumot@ix.netcom.com (Frank Kusumoto)

Arne Bister <a.bister@fz-juelich.de> wrote:
> I found that the tournament entered in my matchup
> history right behind GP Zuerich had the _same_ opponents in the _same_
> order again, influencing (and, in fact, increasing) my limited rating
> once more.
> ...
> So I am supposed to _pay_ five bucks
> for _losing_ DCI rating points after honestly recording that somebody
> entered a GRAND PRIX into the database twice? I don't think so.

      This is a well-known problem, and one that a number of locals have
      taken advantage of - with the blessing of the DC, I note.  Basically,
      since the DC will refund monies paid if you find that it was *their*
      mistake (they don't advertise this well, but all you do is pester
      Peter directly if you get no joy elsewhere :-)), and since you know
      that (especially outside the US) the ratings system is full of holes
      you could drive a Mack truck through, all you do is appeal and find
      (and correct) just enough errors to give you as many ratings points
      you need.

      You save the rest for when you need them later :-)

      A mate of mine went through this exercise, notifying the DC over an
      extended period that:

         o Tournament X was entered twice;
         o Tournament X didn't have the finals put in; and finally
         o Tournament X was Limited, not Standard :-)

      Things like the last example can be exploited in many ways, of course:
      but I note again, all of them are *true* errors, not manufactured
      (false) ones.  It's just that one only tells the DC about their errors
      when it is advantageous to oneself to do so; other errors - like the
      ones entered twice where you *gained* 100 points - are generally
      ignored.  As Arne said, why pay money to fix DC errors which hurt you?
      Someone else will fix those later :-)

      Next thing is to get the "continual error" tournament perfected,
      allowing you to trade off Limited/Extended/Classic/Standard points
      between ratings classes as you need them :-)  A Malaysian consortium
      has evidently expressed interest in funding these research studies...!

            Regards,

                David (trading rating points for beer :-)).

--
{ David J. Low                          |                 d-low@adfa.edu.au }
{ School of Physics, University College |    www.kurasc.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~dlow }
{ Australian Defence Force Academy      |                                   }
{ Canberra, ACT 2600, AUSTRALIA         |   "Advice is a kind of nostalgia" }