QQ

Private Messages: Allowed

You would think that they would have realized that people can see the Public Chat by now.

|> I do know a fair way (with some help of Fizzer)

Maybe I'm crazy, but doesn't needing a bit of help from Fizzer pretty much automatically mean it's an *un*fair way...?

@myhand bueno, esperemos que no pierda su dinero, solo pienso que algunos se toman esta página y pasatiempo de una manera muy intensa. No pierdan el criterio, es sólo un juego, un juego muy bueno, pero un juego al fin.

la apuesta no es en serio, trom; es una broma. me gusta jugar con mis palabras tambien.

If the implication is if Gui had recent lost games he postponed them, then the implication is true from a logical point of view :)

if i ever get a membership i would not join 1v1 ladder because my 1v1 sucks 2v2 better and 3v3

|>"Assumption #4: Gui deeply cares about the 1v1 ladder.
Truth: I don't."

Clearly.

"But since I have the highest rating, I feel obligated to play the minimum."
That's not true, you have said that you feel you must be present in the top level of the 1v1 ladder to gain some measure of respect. That is why you stay on the ladder when you readily admit that you don't enjoy it.

I agree that me pointing out that you are taking a long time on your games was hypocritical, however, I did offer some explanation as to why I don't play quicker.

Assumption #4: Gui deeply cares about the 1v1 ladder.
I think you care about how people percieve you. (see above)

"Assumption #5: Gui is making a $10,000 bet because he is full of himself."
I never made that assumption - now you are being presumptuous. I had a look at both our ladder games and saw that I had wins expiring and you had a loss expiring. I new that you would be on top and obviously you weren't going to bet $10,000.

Assumption #6: Gui cheats the system by playing opponents rated 1900+.
Yes that is my assumption and it still is. If you only play the best, your rating will be higher. You forego the risk of an upset from 1700/1800 players which is always a possibility. Even if you do it only to gain more interesting games, that does not absolve you of the fact that you're gaming the system.

Please continue giving us more of your very entertaining analogies.

Also, I don't see any real drama. This was entirely about you and you felt the need to post it as 1v1 ladder drama. Kinda smacks of egocentrism.

I absolutely play slower when it's not going well. It's human nature. If I'm ahead in a game, the orders are more straight forward. If I'm behind, partly I'm less keen to play, partly I want to make sure I've really thought about it before I do my orders. I of course stop short of extending games when I've clearly lost, and if people are doing that, I suppose I disapprove, but I'm certainly not going to start checking game links to find it happening from others.

When you have a list of 20 games I think it's very natural that the easier games are played first. And I don't feel bad about this at all.

This is unnecessary drama, chill out guys, and let's remember we're on the site to enjoy ourselves.

The Window Cleaner, I completely agree with everything you said.

I've already stated the truth regarding my primary motivations, but now that Ace the Psychiatrist has delved deep into my psyche, I'm beginning to worry about my smacking ego and wonder if that was the curious odor my wife mentioned today...

I'm glad you like my analogies, A&W. I'd be glad to give you another, but since you most remind me of a high school girl who gossips about a prettier girl with her gossip buddy (MathWolf), I would then become the prettier girl in the analogy who ends up with the boy you have a crush on (the #1 ranking), and I don't want to be a girl with a boyfriend. So no more analogies.

you were a reasonable person for so long, gui. has something changed in your life to make you this way? are you being bullied by schoolchildren or something?

AceWindu Quote:

Assumption #6: Gui cheats the system by playing opponents rated 1900+.
Yes that is my assumption and it still is. If you only play the best, your rating will be higher. You forego the risk of an upset from 1700/1800 players which is always a possibility. Even if you do it only to gain more interesting games, that does not absolve you of the fact that you're gaming the system.

@AceWindu : I don`t quite understand that, if you play only the best and by doing so, you win, don`t you deserve to be number one then? And how is that cheating?
Its a bit like a boxer or mma pro, who complains that he had a long career path behind him to get a title shot, while another guy beat the number one contender without that career path. Has he not beaten the number one ? Has he cheated the system by fighting the best right from the start?

I should say that I have not much to add to my words in that chat and I don't mind other people reading them.
But as this seems to be a trending topic, I'll give my 5 cents as one of the protagonists.

Fair way to keep Ace on top: Yes, I knew a way and it would have been completely fair.
How: Ask Fizzer to implement TrueSkill within those 9 days, in TS games don't expire as their weight gradually decreases anyway. Seeing how 10000 dollars is over 300 memberships, it may have been worth trying. I don't know if and when TS will be implemented and if it would have been ready on time, but it may have been possible.

I didn't doubt the bet was a figure of speech as Gui mentioned a few times he didn't even want to support Warlight by buying a membership of his own.

Why I don't particularly like Gui: it's very difficult to get along with someone who is so full of himself, behaves as if he owns Warlight, knows everything better, criticizes everything he didn't invent himself, has no respect for other people's opinions or dismisses them completely in a ridiculous way if too far from his own.
I'm sure he has some good sides too though, sadly enough I didn't see many of them yet.

That said, I never had problems with Gui myself, just don't like his attitude. I'm sure many people don't like mine either. So be it.


Other than that: feel free to overanalyse everything I say in chat as much as you want. I mostly type before I think and I'm way too busy (and ill lately) to look back at things and think twice about them. Besides, English is my third language, so I'm sure there'll be plenty of possible hidden messages you'll find under my at times strange grammar.

You guys are kidding about actually betting 10,000$ ... right ?

@myhand
The point is that he is avoiding the risk of losing a large number of points by losing to a player outside of the top 10/15.

If you play only the best then you lose less points if you lose and gain more if you win.

And I think it's also unfair to players outside the top ranks who could otherwise be matched against Gui, they are being denied the opportunity of playing against him.

@Knoebber

I don't think anyone believed Gui was going to bet $10,000.

lobstrosity: 2054
zaeban: 2107
2/15/2012 8:50:14 PM [中国阳朔] V: 1968
2/13/2012 8:44:16 PM 13CHRIS37: 1972
2/5/2012 10:02:51 AM Barney Stinson: 1705
1/23/2012 9:28:43 PM boobsy: 1580
12/28/2011 8:37:53 AM Tor: 1780
12/25/2011 7:28:41 AM Xyphistor: 1748
12/21/2011 7:14:13 AM ixouaeouxi: 1296
12/19/2011 11:53:47 PM WL Fanatic: 1772

Ace, your argument is fine in theory, but in reality it just isn't the case, as I've already said. Above, my games since I've been in contention for first. Why your assumption is wrong:

1. I've only twice increased my game count to try to play a certain player. I wanted to play V (he is a rising star, I had never played him 1v1 before, I was curious how good he is since he is one of the best players on the 2v2 ladder where we had 2 great games already). I wanted to play the best 1v1 player on the ladder since Impaller quit: zaeban. #1 vs #2 is interesting. #1 vs #30 is not.

2. None of the other guys I've played since being in contention were players I sought out. All were given to me randomly when one guy surrendered and another game was given to me. 10 names listed above. I tried to play 2. A system that only operates 20% of the time is not very effective.

3. I did say it would be a good idea to pick my opponents to make my games more interesting. But I have not cared enough to truly implement that idea, partly for the following two reasons.

4. I suspect Fizzer has slightly restricted (improved!) the algorithm that determines who the top rated players play. I've noticed a few more top players being paired up with other top players recently. Eg, when zaeban increased his games from 1 to 5, he waited a very long time before he got opponents (a couple days maybe). And look at the opponents he got (4 past #1s, 1 future #1):

fwiw: 1900
zibik21: 2008
[REGL] ferbi1982_PL: 1664
Mian: 1823
Guillaume le Bâtard: 2168
bytjie: 1861
2/13/2012 6:59:20 AM Heyheuhei: 1986
2/13/2012 12:44:55 AM Niko: 1737

5. If Fizzer hasn't adjusted his algorithm, according to his old algorithm, my rising rating restricts who can play me anyway, especially since there are so many top rated players I've never played on the ladder, who, according to Fizzer's match selection process, get first dibs: lobstrosity (the system recently paired me up with him), zibik, Teddy, unknown, Dr. Typesomething, alababi. I'm assuming a good number of my next few games will be with these guys.