Life In 19x19

I suppose you could have an old school phone match. It would be Twitch friendly.
https://www.britgo.org/bgj/04108.html

Bill Spight wrote:

Javaness2 wrote:The problem is that we players do not always agree on what is fair. Over the board this was an obvious case for resumption. Over the internet (culture) that obviousness is lost. A rematch would be the next diplomatic attempt to solve the problem. If a rematch isn't agreeable, you would have to give a double default and cancel any future event in 2020.

Resumption would not be equitable because the property of being in byo-yomi has been lost. OTOH, if the parties agreed to a resumption, that would resolve the issue.

Bill, what do you mean by equitable and the property of being in byo-yomi being lost? If I were the TD (accepting the lag happened) and resuming the game then both players would continue with their clocks as they were at the time, ie both on their last 1 minute period (Eric had been on his last period longer than Mateusz) and Mateusz must start with the move he intended to play but lag prevented from arriving in time. Do you mean that because of the many days break in play then both players have had the chance to collect their thoughts and calm down from the potentially panicked mindset of byo-yomi, may have analyzed the game themselves or potentially with other people or bots? This is indeed a concern, but applies equally to both, and given the actual board position is of minor relevance. If there was more of the game to play then I would agree it's a serious problem, but not here.

Uberdude wrote:

Bill Spight wrote:

Javaness2 wrote:The problem is that we players do not always agree on what is fair. Over the board this was an obvious case for resumption. Over the internet (culture) that obviousness is lost. A rematch would be the next diplomatic attempt to solve the problem. If a rematch isn't agreeable, you would have to give a double default and cancel any future event in 2020.

Resumption would not be equitable because the property of being in byo-yomi has been lost. OTOH, if the parties agreed to a resumption, that would resolve the issue.

Bill, what do you mean by equitable and the property of being in byo-yomi being lost?

If timing were not the issue, and unfortunately, it is, then resuming play after Mateusz's play, which did not get recorded, treating the game as having been adjourned with that play as a sealed move, might arguably be the most equitable solution. OC, if the game is resumed, the byo yomi conditions would be restored, but, given what people have reported about the state of the game, that would be of little relevance. Players of this caliber could probably finish the rest of the game in under 5 minutes total for both players with at most an error of 2 pts., given the length of time that has elapsed for study. Now, resuming the game may still be the most equitable solution, but I am sure that the officials have considered and deliberated that question. I did not want to argue the case one way or the other, but to point out that equity cannot be perfectly restored.

I do think that the tournament conditions need to be changed so that time is kept locally, not by KGS. There is even a low tech solution to the timing problem.

Edit: I opined a maximum error of 2 pts. That's assuming that bots were not used for analysis.

Another entirely foreseeable problem of internet play is misclicks. Thankfully none have happened yet, but the rules for misclicks and undos should be clarified in addition to regarding lag. So what should the rules be. A strict no undos for any reason? I think that's unsatisfactory, imagine the kerfuffle if a game was decided by some obvious nonsense misclick. Obviously no undos for misthinks. I'd suggest rules something like:

== Misclicks ==
- A misclick occurs when a player, through careless use of the mouse, accidentally plays on a different intersection to the one they intended.
- To reduce the chance of misclicks players should use a phyiscal mouse (not a trackpad) and turn on KGS's mouse anti-slip feature [assuming the games are on KGS].
- If a player makes a misclick, they must immediately (within 1 second) announce "Misclick!" to the proctor. You cannot decide it is a misclick after staring at the move for some time. If the opponent replies within that one second the misclick is still eligible for undo.
- The misclicking player requests an undo through KGS, and the proctor confirms it was validly announced through a side-channel to the opponent's proctor.
- The opponent must allow the the undo for the first misclick of the game, having received confirmation from their proctor it was valid.
- Subsequent undos for misclicks are at the discretion of the opponent.

playing on the internet sucks for serious competition - haha

Keep rules simple: no undo.

Uberdude wrote:Another entirely foreseeable problem of internet play is misclicks. Thankfully none have happened yet, but the rules for misclicks and undos should be clarified in addition to regarding lag. So what should the rules be. A strict no undos for any reason? I think that's unsatisfactory, imagine the kerfuffle if a game was decided by some obvious nonsense misclick. Obviously no undos for misthinks. I'd suggest rules something like:

== Misclicks ==
- A misclick occurs when a player, through careless use of the mouse, accidentally plays on a different intersection to the one they intended.
- To reduce the chance of misclicks players should use a phyiscal mouse (not a trackpad) and turn on KGS's mouse anti-slip feature [assuming the games are on KGS].
- If a player makes a misclick, they must immediately (within 1 second) announce "Misclick!" to the proctor. You cannot decide it is a misclick after staring at the move for some time. If the opponent replies within that one second the misclick is still eligible for undo.
- The misclicking player requests an undo through KGS, and the proctor confirms it was validly announced through a side-channel to the opponent's proctor.
- The opponent must allow the the undo for the first misclick of the game, having received confirmation from their proctor it was valid.
- Subsequent undos for misclicks are at the discretion of the opponent.

@sorin

No, sometimes a missclick appears, during an lag, cause the system made problems, not the finger slipped. Also a fingerslip is a problem, in a real live tournament it wouldn´t count as a move, if accidently a stone falls from your finger and lands on a point. In these case it would be undone.

To let it simple I say it again. There should be some rules, which gives the referee a good base for estimation and enough authority, that his judgement after the estimation will be done, no option of arguing any further.

That can also help, for situations not occured or mentioned yet. Give some estimation options to the referee, a base to decide, but enough freedom, that he can use it on many things and that gives him authority too, no arguing options after judgement. Who wants to argue after the judgement and don´t wanna hear, that there is no option for it (after they reminded him of that fact), loses the game.

Even in law there are decisions and judgements, depending on estimation, cause live doesn´t always follow the rules and there things occuring nobody could foresee. So there are some laws even build up on estimation (ok I know this fact exactly here in Germany, but it´s logical that other nations would do the same).

sorin wrote:Keep rules simple: no undo.

Uberdude wrote:Another entirely foreseeable problem of internet play is misclicks.

With its built-in trackpad, my computer clicks without my clicking at all.

When I was running the EGF referee workshops I said:"The purpose of tournament rules is to dstinguish the skill of playing go form other skills for example physical, social, technical skills. The effect of other skills shoud be minimized."

Bearing this in mind, I would have the game continued.

Money and human resources have been invested in the match. In the subsequent games it should be possible to implement a backup plan with backup communications in case of problems. One could even consider that the players play with real boards and the proctors play the opponents moves on the board.

Violence wrote: If Mateusz was not himself but another player with a history of cheating or underhanded play, you must be able to make the same ruling.
If the game was not almost decided but instead still very much in question, you must be able to make the same ruling.

1) In case the tournament organizer announced clear rules how to deal with lags, then these rules shall apply. Case closed.

2) In case there are no rules, the organizer needs
- to solve this unique situation
- to create rules that will be valid for next games
I don't think the newly created rules must be retrospectively applied to the game Lui-Surma. We are in an unfortunate situation, and IMO the organizer needs to apologize to players and to try to find a solution that will be acceptable for both sides.

Bill Spight wrote:

sorin wrote:Keep rules simple: no undo.

Uberdude wrote:Another entirely foreseeable problem of internet play is misclicks.

With its built-in trackpad, my computer clicks without my clicking at all.

Bill, you can invest in a better mouse for the next online tournament

My concern with any well intended rule for misclicks is that it will be abused in creative ways, and create more trouble than it's worth:

"What do you mean it is unlikely to misclick for 30 moves in a row?"
"What do you mean I cannot undo after 5 seconds, that was clearly less than 1 second where I come from!"
etc...

Matti wrote:One could even consider that the players play with real boards and the proctors play the opponents moves on the board.

And maybe with real clocks on each side (one clock indicates the time for one player but not for the other player).

Uberdude wrote:Another entirely foreseeable problem of internet play is misclicks.

I was recording a high level, in-person game once for the initial AGA pro tournament, and one of the players made a really strange move. We asked him about the move after the game to see if he was thinking something we couldn't see. He replied, "I misclicked"

xed_over wrote:...one of the players made a really strange move. We asked him about the move after the game to see if he was thinking something we couldn't see. He replied, "I misclicked"

In games within Euro team championship you can see players asking for an undo after a misclick.
I have no idea how are the official rules though.

1. I hope that Eric recognizes his responsibility to come out and resign this game. Remaining silent is unsportsmanlike to Mateusz and also has a negative impact on his image as a player and the whole tournament.

2. For the purposes of clarifying rules for games in future online tournaments, there are two ways to address the issue in the future

The simple way (perhaps unfair and not in the spirit of the game)
2.1 In an online match, regardless of the reason, the player who times out automatically loses.

The complex way (more fair and in the spirit of the game but harder to implement)

2.2. In an online match that is proctored, if the proctor finds evidence the player times out due to circumstances beyond their control (computer crashes, lag, connectivity issues, etc.) the match will be

2.2.1 replayed
2.2.2 continued
2.2.2.1 from the last move sent to the server
2.2.2.2 from the last move which would have been sent to the server had the lag or issue not occurred
(must also specify rules here at which point connectivity lag issues are reported, by which party, and process to rule for a replay or continuation)

2.2 otherwise, the player who times out automatically loses