Search

Showdog.com Forum · Bug Reporting and Suggestions

Replies in this thread : 12

Author Topic : Point averages make unfair game play
 Foxley Cockers
Premium Member
Posts : 1,000+

System.__ComObject
11/4/2017 10:37:05 AM reply with quote send message to Foxley Cockers Object to Post   

We had a recent problem in cockers in which a new player entered every dog in their kennel in every no handler shows. This sky rocketed our point average system. The only way to get majors is enter shows under this new players rules. Everything no handler.
Most of us have our ten year awards. We all get along well together. When one of our players voiced her opinion, several people entered the discussion, insulting our players with threatening language for approaching this subject in our forum.
Now everyone feels angry. None of this works of course, but I would like to bring this to admins attention. Our new economy is great, but there's a glitch that allows a player take over a breed. The only majors are in no handler shows.
My solution is. If Jeff can either set a limit on the number of dogs one kennel enter in a show or exclude no handler shows from the point averaging system.
 Supernatural85
Premium Member
Posts : 44

Premium Member
11/4/2017 10:40:00 AM reply with quote send message to Supernatural85 Object to Post

I shared this on the other thread but think it belongs here too

"Or make a cap on the amount of dogs needed to get a 5 point major to be a percentage of the breed.

In kuvasz it worked out at something like a quarter of all dogs needed to enter to get a 5 point major (which is like half if you consider that bitches and dogs are counted separately)

So maybe it could be that the number needed for a 5 point major is no more than 15 per cent of the number of dogs in the breed? with the others worked out accordingly"
 
Basic User
Posts : 1,000+

Basic User
11/4/2017 1:24:54 PM reply with quote send message to Object to Post edit post

Foxley -

I strongly disagree. While I don't agree with the playing style, It is within the rules.

We brought it to the users attention and I think she reconsidered her methods.

The scale will return to a lower amount next month.

As players, we just need to step up our game and steal the majors with better dogs.

If the player was using up all the handlers, I would be singing a different tune... but the player hasn't went that far.

Will
 BarStar Goldens
Premium Member
Posts : 257

Premium Member
11/4/2017 1:25:13 PM reply with quote send message to BarStar Goldens Object to Post

quote
posted by
Foxley -

I strongly disagree. While I don't agree with the playing style, It is within the rules.

We brought it to the users attention and I think she reconsidered her methods.

The scale will return to a lower amount next month.

As players, we just need to step up our game and steal the majors with better dogs.

If the player was using up all the handlers, I would be singing a different tune... but the player hasn't went that far.

Will

 Foxley Cockers
Premium Member
Posts : 1,000+

Premium Member
11/4/2017 2:53:34 PM reply with quote send message to Foxley Cockers Object to Post

Taking all the handlers is within the rules also. Sometimes we get energetic players that stay up all night and spend hours making entries.I'm not bothered by these people. They usually burn out or find a more competitive breed.
The problem I'm addressing doesn't take time, energy, or strategy.It's a problem with the system that can be easily remedied.
I don't care if another player wants to enter all their dogs in one show. I could win over them most the time if I tried, but I figure they are beginners so let them win. I go on to enter another show. But if it's going to effect our point system, It just isn't right. It shouldn't be able to happen.


 Silk N Denim Terriers
Premium Member
Posts : 193

Premium Member
11/4/2017 3:29:57 PM reply with quote send message to Silk N Denim Terriers Object to Post

quote
posted by Foxley Cockers
Taking all the handlers is within the rules also. Sometimes we get energetic players that stay up all night and spend hours making entries.I'm not bothered by these people. They usually burn out or find a more competitive breed.
The problem I'm addressing doesn't take time, energy, or strategy.It's a problem with the system that can be easily remedied.
I don't care if another player wants to enter all their dogs in one show. I could win over them most the time if I tried, but I figure they are beginners so let them win. I go on to enter another show. But if it's going to effect our point system, It just isn't right. It shouldn't be able to happen.



Why should other players suffer from entry limits and being excluded from earning points because you can't be bothered to step it up and just use strategy to play the game?

You are not going to drop this and just play the game until you get your way are you?

You have went beyond having a legitimate grievance to being flat out petty.
 Foxley Cockers
Premium Member
Posts : 1,000+

Premium Member
11/4/2017 11:16:15 PM reply with quote send message to Foxley Cockers Object to Post

I don't want to play a game for kindergarteners. That's what your asking. There's no strategy in entering all of your dog's in a no handler show. I just don't get your comment. Sorry you aren't making any sense. What I'm talking about would help all players. I don't get why you think you need to come off like some big shot.
 Silk N Denim Terriers
Premium Member
Posts : 193

Premium Member
11/5/2017 1:37:58 AM reply with quote send message to Silk N Denim Terriers Object to Post

this post has been edited 1 time(s)

quote
posted by Foxley Cockers
My solution is. If Jeff can either set a limit on the number of dogs one kennel enter in a show or exclude no handler shows from the point averaging system.
I am going to address both of your suggestions.

First, you need to define what you mean by no handler show.

The only true non handler shows in the game are the SDWC, National Specialties, and user created no handler specialties.

As far as I know we have no ability to create no handler all breed shows. I believe there was a glitch that allowed this some time back but it was fixed.

Keeping what I said above in mind, how would Jeff implement a points system that did not award points for no handler shows? Are you proposing that wins at the SDWC and National Specialty shows should not receive points simply because they are true no handler shows?

How would excluding these shows from awarding points stop people from showing excess numbers of dogs?

It would not, people would boycott it and I do not believe Jeff would ever even consider it.

As to the point of judges who prefer the dogs to be owner handled, they are few and far between. And they have to like you dog for it to be advantageous to you.

Doing away with those judges would create an unbalanced judging system that is not in line with the model upon which this game is based.

I don't follow judges very closely, but I believe the general consensus of the game is that we need more owner/handler judges, not less.

Then there is the issue of players who simply choose not to use handlers regardless of the number of dogs they show.

Why should they be penalized by a points system that does not allow them to earn points because they choose to owner handler?

Not everybody in the game wants to spend all their time matching every dog they show to a judge and handler and they should not be penalized for a choice that is well within the rules of the game.

As I stated earlier, you need to define your idea of a no handler show in order to suggest a points system that would not award points based upon being a no handler show.
***********************************************

As to your second suggestion, which is limiting the number of dogs a kennel is allowed to show.

What is your idea of a fair limit?

This to me is counterproductive. You say you want to play fairly, yet by limiting the number of dogs shown you are in essence limiting your competition which is hardly fair play.

I would much rather beat 45 dogs in an open entry system, than beat 10 dogs in a restricted entry show.

By limiting the amount of dogs a kennel can show you open the door to players just creating more kennels from which to show dogs. You have solved nothing. You will still have the same problem.

On another note...

A few years ago the game was at a point to where the rarer breeds had such low entry numbers that some of the National Specialties were not even running because of lack of entries. Jeff lowered the number needed from 10 to 5.

There are some breeds that at times only have one person showing in them. The limit would have to be at least 5 in order for specialties to still run.

How boring would it be to be the only player in your breed and be limited to showing 5 dogs?

How would a serious player in a rare breed have any chance of showing a noteworthy dog to any of the higher level Grand Champion medals only being able to show 5 dogs a night? 10 at most if they sponsor a specialty for themselves every night.

For example, and I will use Silky Terriers in my example.

A dog can show for 106 days.

The current point schedule for Siklies for a 3 point major is 4 dogs and 4 bitches.

If a player does not sponsor a specialty every night they show the dog, they can earn 318 points. Double that if they sponsor specialties.

Not to mention the fact they may not have enough dogs or bitches to full fill the requirements.

This is not far fetched. I specialize in rare breeds and there have been many times where I have been the only player showing for months.

Why should players like this be penalized and not allowed to show a dog to it's full potential simply because they do have not competition?
***********************************************

As I said in my other post, why should players be limited on how they play the game because you don't want to just put some effort into playing?

You stated you could probably beat the player whose strategy you didn't agree with, but you choose to just let them win for whatever reason.

Helping someone by pulling a dog, or in some other way is one thing, But to choose to let other people win and then want to change the game in such drastic ways is totally a different matter.

I should not have to change the entire way I play the game because you choose to let other people win, nor should anyone else.

-----
Last edited by Silk N Denim Terriers on 11/5/2017 1:44:56 AM
 
Basic User
Posts : 1,000+

Basic User
11/5/2017 10:37:45 AM reply with quote send message to Object to Post edit post

this post has been edited 1 time(s)


quote
As far as limiting number dogs one kennel can enter per show, I would set that at 5. This should be enough to finish animals, if you understand the system. [\quote]

No thanks. I am playing generally alone in my breed right now and I don't mind it. Limiting this would punish breeds with already low entries. 5 is too arbitrary a number for me.

-----
Last edited by Comet Poodles on 11/5/2017 12:39:59 PM
 Foxley Cockers
Premium Member
Posts : 1,000+

Premium Member
11/5/2017 10:39:31 AM reply with quote send message to Foxley Cockers Object to Post

Above post was me.
 willow wood
Premium Member
Posts : 183

Premium Member
11/5/2017 4:05:38 PM reply with quote send message to willow wood Object to Post

Oh thank you comet poodles for deleting Foxleys post. That was super low. There are other ways to win. We're just not use to playing with people that barge into our breed and behave unsportsmanlike. We're not worried about them or these insulting comments. This group has been around for a long time. We will be here when you are all gone.
 Degree
Basic User
Posts : 500+

Basic User
11/5/2017 4:53:51 PM reply with quote send message to Degree Object to Post

this post has been edited 2 time(s)

Comet Poodles here for my oldest account (not in use since I dropped from Family) in case anyone has questions about my posts and where I stand as an 11 year player --

a) Not sure what insane glitch caused the deletion of OPs post to be replaced with mine. I can say I've never seen that happen before.

b) I am merely commenting on my situation in a small breed. Too arbitrary, and doesn't benefit me and I'm sure will not benefit many other breeds/players.

c)
quote
We will be here when you are all gone.
Also, not sure what this means? When who is gone?

Thanks,


ETA I am also a fairly recent ACS breeder. I couldn't keep up with so many accounts, unfortunately. I have a 97.6 SOP buff bitch I'd like to see sold for breeding to an established breeder.

showdog.com/dog.aspx?id=15839493

Please PM me @ Comet Poodles if interested in her! Sorry to hijack your post, OP! laugh :D

-----
Last edited by Degree on 11/5/2017 4:55:48 PM

-----
Last edited by Degree on 11/5/2017 5:02:33 PM
 Foxley Cockers
Premium Member
Posts : 1,000+

Premium Member
11/5/2017 7:48:01 PM reply with quote send message to Foxley Cockers Object to Post

I think we presented both sides of an argument. Enough said.

about being here when you are all gone, I meant those arguing and insulting others when I was just trying to bring up an issue that appeared unfair.

After having the situation brought to my attention by another cocker breeder, I posted here to inform admin of the situation. Anyone could present their side without directly insulting me. This is why I rarely post in the forums. I'm not arguing another player.

Replies in this thread : 12

Post Reply

 



Did you know?
The third obedience title is a UD, or "Utility Dog", which is earned through competition in the Utility obedience class