Sportsmanship

Norse · Post by **Norse** » Mon Mar 17, 2003 3:33 pm

Deathwing wrote: Norse pointed out recently that he really hasn't enjoyed some of his games in the last 2 Open tournies he's played at simply due to some of his opponents' attitude, to the extent that he's thinking of ducking the Opens for a while and playing at invitationals only. That's tragic.

sad, but true... some people have really spoiled BB for me recently and it is enough to drive me away from Opens altogether... I'm adult enough not to vote with my fists (though I would love to!

) so I vote with my feet instead.... shame, I've met a lot of nice guys... sad that one or two of the minority have spoiled what could have been fantastic weekends.... maybe I just need to

a bit more... seems to work for LongFang!

Post by **DoubleSkulls** » Mon Mar 17, 2003 4:50 pm

Grumbledook wrote:i thought the system at fanatic was fine tbh, i don't think it should have a big impact on the final results, winning games should be the first consideration for placings, though that doesn't mean you have to be a bad person while your playing.

The main thing I didn't like about TBB's scoring was that there was no incentive to even get 1 sportsmanship vote. +1 point even if no one voted for you is a complete joke as it does nothing to penalise the w#nk*rs.

To my mind sportsmanship in BB has two main priorities - encourage everyone to try to be a good sportsman, and reward those who are.

Mestari · Post by **Mestari** » Mon Mar 17, 2003 5:44 pm

ianwilliams wrote: encourage everyone to try to be a good sportsman, and reward those who are.

Well said. This is a social sport more than anything. Everyone is supposed to have fun and the w@nkers who try to spoil the fun for everyone else should be penalised (or the others rewarded - just the same as long as the effect remains).

Deathwing · Post by **Deathwing** » Mon Mar 17, 2003 6:27 pm

ianwilliams wrote:
To my mind sportsmanship in BB has two main priorities - encourage everyone to try to be a good sportsman, and reward those who are.

I'd go further. To my mind it should actively discourage bad sportmanship, and punish those who repeatedly display it.

That minority are those that can spoil the enjoyment of others who have usually paid to take part and more often than not travelled to do so as well.
I think we need to be saying to problem players 'You have a duty to your opponent to show a certain standard of courtesy, and if you repeatedly piss off your opponents then you will be hammered in the final results table until you learn to show the required standard.'

We can't all be great/really entertaining opponents, but we can opt not to be bad ones. It's not rocket science. Just rewarding the good doesn't do enough to discourage the bad IMO.

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Mon Mar 17, 2003 6:52 pm

Thats all well and good in a perfect world but whats to stop bad sports from voting everyone else down, or to stop tactical voting but anyone, like the situation at spikey where sportsmanship ended up not being counted at all.

dantitan76 · Post by **dantitan76** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 8:15 am

Just to say that all my oponents where great players and enjoyed specialy playing against Anthony. By the way, whats your proyect for your next Year team????

Norse · Post by **Norse** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 8:56 am

Ok, this is a bit out of the box, but stick with me OK....

I asked myself last night what other 2 person activity would I like to be thought of as good fun at and I thought of Sex.... (pay attention Grumble, when you finally get laid you might need some of this...

)

What does it mean to be a good lover? Well, someone who is more interested in their partner's pleasure than their own (or well hung, but the former matters more!)

What does it mean to be a good BB opponent (not coach, opponent)? Someone who is determined that their opponent will enjoy the game whether they roll ones or sixes.... If more people entered a game determined that their opponent was going to have fun (win/loss/draw) then sportsmanship would not be an issue!!!

Maybe I

a bit too much....

squiggoth · Post by **squiggoth** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 9:38 am

So now you're comparing BloodBowl with sex? I don't know what you've been doing at the Dutch Open but I DO know why Stefan has been walking around with a limp since that weekend...

(Remind me to concede before the start of the match if I ever have to play you!)

Martijn

Deathwing · Post by **Deathwing** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 10:05 am

Grumbledook wrote:Thats all well and good in a perfect world but whats to stop bad sports from voting everyone else down, or to stop tactical voting but anyone, like the situation at spikey where sportsmanship ended up not being counted at all.

Any sportmanship system that is factored into final results is prone to abuse/tactical voting. The simplest way around it is accountability, although this has several issues.

For the record at Spiky, sportmanship was counted. 27 people got 10pts, 8 got 9pts and 3 got 8pts. One guy (who I've heard several people complain about) got 7. It cost him a position in the final table, as indeed it did for a few people who got 8 or 9.

Going back to the 'black mark' idea. (6 games) How about something like:
Ignore the first one (lessens effect of tactical voting/bad losing).
2 black marks: deduct 10% of final points tally.
3 black marks: deduct 25% of final points tally.

If you couple that with optional 'commendation' marks for games you really enjoy, you'll still get a nice guy/entertaining opponent award at the end of the tourney.

Of course you'd have to explictly state criteria for awarding a black mark in the rules pack (and for the record I wouldn't have handed out any in the 26 tourney games I've played in since (and inc.) Res.). That way people should have no complaints about overstepping whatever line the organisers choose to draw.

Ok, I'm not saying it's ideal or anything, I just feel that with the NAF rankings and burgeoning tourney scene, BB is bound to get more competitive over time. I'd hate to see a hardcore harking back to 'the good old days' when tournies were played in a friendlier spirit, or worse still drifting away from the scene altogether because that spirit has diminished to a point they find unacceptable. Granted, that's a pretty bleak scenario, but it's not outside the realms of possibility. That whole possibility could be eradicated by a system that says:
'You will not behave in a manner that pisses off a significant amount of your opponents without penalty.'

Post by **DoubleSkulls** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 12:21 pm

The other thing to do is if a coach gives out lots of black marks/commendations then the refs ought to ask them why. This helps to stop the worst abuses (either way).

Anthony_TBBF · Post by **Anthony_TBBF** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 8:12 pm

The system John came up with at the Underworld Cup has worked well for us. We'll be using it again at Orion this weekend. Basically you rank your opponent's from "best" to "worst" at the end of the event and you are given points for each placing:

1st: 10pts
2nd: 8pts
3rd: 4pts
4th: 2pts

So if I was ranked 1st, 2nd twice and 4th (after a 4 game tourney) by my opponents at the end, I would get 28 points.

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 8:18 pm

thats a huge difference between 10 and 2 points and can be badly exploited by "cheating coaches", of course its not a problem if the coaches are legit.

Though we can argue this out all day, it comes down to the coaches in the tournament to how well each system works.

Skummy · Post by **Skummy** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 8:27 pm

Squiggoth: So now you're comparing BloodBowl with sex?

Top 6 similarities between Blood Bowl and sex:

6 Done too much of both in parent's basement.
5 Back hurts like hell after 3 hours of either.
4 Everyone has a good time, right?
3 You hate to be interrupted.
2 Limited number of "rerolls."

1 Damn that 4 minute rule!

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 8:39 pm

you missed out number 7) Norse isn't very good at it ;]

Anthony_TBBF · Post by **Anthony_TBBF** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 8:40 pm

thats a huge difference between 10 and 2 points

So far it has worked well for us, but you can always tweak the points you give for each rank.