Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Reverse psychology strikes back!

I agree that TO's should pay more attention to scores but not all of them do. But honestly how many people want to give up their weekends to "judge" a tourney?

Roaming judges would be nice to be on the look out for any potential cheaters or people that need help interpreting the rules.

You can also have people that are dedicated looking over the score cards, if they see a certain person is always tanking another persons sportsmanship especially if their opponent has had good/great sportsmanship thus far than obviously it's a fluke. But if a particular players sportsmanship is bad from the get go maybe the guy really is just a douche.

I think there should be sportsmanship scores, but they should not affect the battle points. They should just be there so the judges know who needs to be hit with the 'ole yardstick. This keeps the good aspect of sportsmanship scores (preventing cheating) while losing the bad aspect (voting someone down because you lost, don't like their hairstyle, etc.).

I also think it would be nice to have a small prize ($10-20 store credit for instance) for best sportsman, but again it should not affect the winner of the tournament.

Blackmoor wrote:Can someone make an argument of why we need sportsmanship at a tournament?

The UK system works well here by just giving TFG a yellow card as a warning, and a red card and an ejection.

I think you answered your own question.

If TOs uniformly grew a pair and weren't afraid to put their collective foot up a TFG's backside, Sports wouldn't be an issue. In the US, simply make "Zero Tolerance" Sports the norm for Tournament play, sack up, and boot the TFGs without any refunds.

Anybody think its ironic none of the Canadians have commented on this thread?




I slap you with my stick and punch you in yo face!

No, no sir, go sit in the timeout box for 2 whole minutes you bad boy...


just sayin'...

Canadians as a whole are far too polite for any of this discussion to make any sense.

I mean, they apologize to furniture they bump into...

Maybe a set of guidelines such as;

did you opponent measure correctly?

have standards for re-rolling questionable dice lands?

Manage time fairly?

I think it would be advantageous to keep people "honest", and by no means able to be used against them without raising a red flag.
I mean if you get say sports, or whatever we want to call it, score of "x" and then your next round you get "x-5" then there could be a program feature to notify the judge to check that slip of paper and if necessary follow up with the line judge and see why the change is so drastic. You could even go as far as to compare the guy that gave the low score's previous matches as well and see if they dinged people and then perhaps adjust or talk with them separately. That would keep chimpunking to a minimum, BUT require more work/ computer excel code etc and someone willing to enact it.

just my .02 Alan.

I think it is very biased on the part of the judges. Some simple rules are easily judged and continued the game, which is why I have described this as a "gentleman's game". If it's questionable because you know the rules, point it out... if it's questionable about a millimeter or a rule not covered in FAQ, let it go. It makes for a much easier, less anal-retentive game by playing that way. assume your opponent will grant you the same level of politeness. (but often they don't, and argue about every little nitpick... and I think they are jerks... RAW junkies and whiners about dice gods come to mind.

The point of a gathering of gamers is to play games, have fun, not get all crazy about exact wording of rules, or micromeasuring distances. Those are the people who I would score low on sportsmanship. The friendly and not-too-argumentative ones would score higher, it's that simple... but maybe I'm resurected Ghandi or something for feeling that way and all it takes is one bully to ruin the peace.

when ever a little complaint about a millimeter difference, or the length of the barrel of a gun on a tank becomes questioned, that's what the 'sportsman' points are for. You know what the 'intent' was from a player's move, and maybe his model's sword got in the way in distancing, or maybe your extra "hull" modifications make your tank visible, or a tiny terrain piece gets in the way of something trivial, like a millimeter difference between someone being in the open or getting a cover save, when your tank's intention was very obvious to both players. Those things are just a$shole kind of nitpicks used by competetive players, and would deserve a low sportsmanship score.

There are a lot of incongruities in a 40k game, and I think the 'sportsmanship' score would, ideally, represent a person's ability to let that stuff go, because it is not an exact game. Players trying to manipulate the 'sportsmanship' system for their tournament advantage I would think should actually get penalized points, but who is to judge who is playing like a nice guy and who is playing like an a hole... probably some other a hole.

It's the system of who scores you is the problem.

I completely disagree with the other player giving you a score because I have never ever met a loser who is happy about it. I think it should be more based on the judge's observation of the game and how the players treat each other, not the opinion of the loser. But that would require judges who aren't socially awkward competetive dorks too, so that's a difficult equilibrium to find.

Timmah wrote:Nope, there isn't one.

I do not get why you would ever put a score in a tournament just to insure people played by the RULES.

Unfortunately, this statement proves that you don't completely understand what sportsmanship is. By it's very definition, sportsmanship is much more than just "playing by the rules". It is about conduct befitting of a player, including being courteous and being graceful if you lose. Honestly, it's just about being polite. Is it really that hard to be polite to another person?

And as far as tanking sportsmanship scores go, the only way to prevent it is for the judges to look out for it. If someone tanks soft scores because they want an advantage or because they're a sore loser, it's very easy to tell. Judges just have to be on the lookout for it. And it is completely possible to be able to keep track of that kind of thing even in a large scale tournament, just have to know what you're looking for and have enough judges to be able to keep the event on track. That's just the basics of planning and running an event.

At the end of the day, I don't really mind if there's no sportsmanship scores, though I do prefer them. If everyone at an event can be courteous then it's not needed, but it has been proven on multiple occasions that some people are not able to show even a modicum of respect for anyone else. But, if you're not an abrasive person and have a semblance of manners, you have nothing to worry about, so why fight it?

Zomro wrote:And as far as tanking sportsmanship scores go, the only way to prevent it is for the judges to look out for it. If someone tanks soft scores because they want an advantage or because they're a sore loser, it's very easy to tell. Judges just have to be on the lookout for it. And it is completely possible to be able to keep track of that kind of thing even in a large scale tournament, just have to know what you're looking for and have enough judges to be able to keep the event on track. That's just the basics of planning and running an event.

If you have ample judges, and they are being vigilant, they should spend their time patrolling the tables and stopping bad sportsmanship while it is happening. Not sitting behind a table and trying to trace a paper trail of chip-munkers.

I'd appreciate it more if a judge walked over to a table where i was versing a bad apple and told the guy to knock it off or he was out, rather than get an email a week after the tournament from some TO thats telling me that they refunded some of my sportsmanship score because they noticed in their detective work that someone had unfairly docked me.

As a paying tourney attendee its not my job to make sure my opponent is acting like a normal human being... and if I start self-judging my game, because he is cheating or just doesn't know the rules, or i tell the guy that he is acting like a tool and I'm not having fun, what do i get? Docked sports...

Flawed system...

Shep wrote:

Zomro wrote:And as far as tanking sportsmanship scores go, the only way to prevent it is for the judges to look out for it. If someone tanks soft scores because they want an advantage or because they're a sore loser, it's very easy to tell. Judges just have to be on the lookout for it. And it is completely possible to be able to keep track of that kind of thing even in a large scale tournament, just have to know what you're looking for and have enough judges to be able to keep the event on track. That's just the basics of planning and running an event.

If you have ample judges, and they are being vigilant, they should spend their time patrolling the tables and stopping bad sportsmanship while it is happening. Not sitting behind a table and trying to trace a paper trail of chip-munkers.

I'd appreciate it more if a judge walked over to a table where i was versing a bad apple and told the guy to knock it off or he was out, rather than get an email a week after the tournament from some TO thats telling me that they refunded some of my sportsmanship score because they noticed in their detective work that someone had unfairly docked me.

As a paying tourney attendee its not my job to make sure my opponent is acting like a normal human being... and if I start self-judging my game, because he is cheating or just doesn't know the rules, or i tell the guy that he is acting like a tool and I'm not having fun, what do i get? Docked sports...

Flawed system...

You're right, it isn't your job to make sure your opponent is acting a certain way, that'd be silly. If you are polite, you should be acting as such because you believe that how you should be acting. You aren't there to teach your opponent manners. If your opponent has bad sportsmanship, you mark that down on the score, period.

Also, I'm not sure what your point is about self-judging your game. If your opponent is cheating, you don't call it out because you shouldn't be "judging" your game? You just let him do it because it's not your job? Playing by the rules works both ways. Player responsibility is not just you playing by the rules, it's to make sure that your opponent does as well. Pointing out a wrongly played rule does not make you a bad sportsman, it's how you act while doing it.

If a judge is patrolling the gaming area and sees bad sportsmanship going on, what exactly is he supposed to do about it? If you're not cheating, what are they going to do? All your idea is really doing is just wasting a judge's attention when they should be there to do what they're there to do, judge rules disputes. It's far more reasonable to expect the people tabulating scores to see someone tanking scores than it is to expect the judges to be baby sitters.

Zomro wrote:Pointing out a wrongly played rule does not make you a bad sportsman, it's how you act while doing it.

Still will probably get you marked down on sportsmanship, though. Unless the judges do take the time and effort to police all the scores, if you play a TFG, yeah you can hit his score, but he's also dropping yours, so nothing is solved. It just gives TFG a way to mess with your tournament experience beyond the fact that you had to put up with him for two hours. If the judges are policing scores, couldn't that time be better spent just policing players in general and looking for TFG anyway?

I guess one of my big problems with sportsmanship scores is that it can negatively impact regular guys just as bad as it can TFGs. At best, by the time you mark down sports after the game, TFG has already ruined that game for you. I'd just rather the judge come over and tell him to knock it off so I can possibly salvage a decent game out of it.

Zomro wrote:If a judge is patrolling the gaming area and sees bad sportsmanship going on, what exactly is he supposed to do about it? If you're not cheating, what are they going to do? All your idea is really doing is just wasting a judge's attention when they should be there to do what they're there to do, judge rules disputes. It's far more reasonable to expect the people tabulating scores to see someone tanking scores than it is to expect the judges to be baby sitters.

Bogus, and if widespread this sentiment would simply show the amateurish level on which 40k events are run. If a player or a coach, or even a fan, is being flagrantly rude or disrespectful, or interfering in the flow of an event, it is the job of the judge/referee/umpire to call them on it, and if necessary, dock them with an appropriate penalty or remove them from the event.

It's not babysitting, it's the superior method of behavior enforcement than waiting until after the match is over and asking each player how nice they were, and arbitrating any disagreement regarding the niceness rankings.

I run tournaments fairly regularly, and we include: comp, sportsmanship, painting/presentation, etc. and we never have a problem with it.

Wanna know the secret? We give out different prizes for different categories. That's right, I don't care how 'broken' you or the other players think your list is (as long as it's legal) it won't hurt your battle score...don't expect to with the comp prize at the end of the day though with your 3 Rune Priest, and six 5xGrey Hunter w/Razorback spam list.

Are you an excellent painter but a terrible player!? I don't care, one has no impact on the other, thus they are graded in different ways with different rubrics. You paint better, you get painting prize! You play better, you get playing prize! Not the biggest a-hole!? YOU GET SPORTSMANSHIP PRIZE!!!!!!

Ahhh, life is so simple and sweet.


Edit: Fixin' mah grammars.

@RxGhost:

You're my hero!

I think the gripe here is that it all comes down to a judge's ruling which some players think is unfair. Personally, if I played a good game against a good player who was nice and friendly about the whole thing, I would want that guy to score some extra points for not being a sore loser or a rules lawyer or a ref-botherer. But that's just the way I approach this game. Some other people travel a thousand miles to a tournament they prepped for months to enter, and don't want some arbitrary troll-faced ref determine whether they get to the finals or not. That is completely understandable. I reiterate, why don't we all just play nice and then we wouldn't need a ref to tell people what their score is on playing nice.

CitizenPrime wrote:Anybody think its ironic none of the Canadians have commented on this thread?




I slap you with my stick and punch you in yo face!

No, no sir, go sit in the timeout box for 2 whole minutes you bad boy...


just sayin'...

I'm Canadian and I commented. For some reason my little flag is American; how do I change that?

Totally agree... Sound like you got an aweful lot of common sense there RxGhost. A good solid, junk free, answer. You must be from the south.

MorbidlyObeseMonkey wrote:

CitizenPrime wrote:Anybody think its ironic none of the Canadians have commented on this thread?




I slap you with my stick and punch you in yo face!

No, no sir, go sit in the timeout box for 2 whole minutes you bad boy...


just sayin'...

I'm Canadian and I commented. For some reason my little flag is American; how do I change that?

You can't, you have been assimilated. Here's an order of fried cheese sticks with ranch and some terrible reality television.

RxGhost wrote:I run tournaments fairly regularly, and we include: comp, sportsmanship, painting/presentation, etc. and we never have a problem with it.

Wanna know the secret? We give out different prizes for different categories. That's right, I don't care how 'broken' you or the other players think your list is (as long as it's legal) it won't hurt your battle score...don't expect to with the comp prize at the end of the day though with your 3 Rune Priest, and six 5xGrey Hunter w/Razorback spam list.

Are you an excellent painter but a terrible player!? I don't care, one has no impact on the other, thus they are graded in different ways with different rubrics. You paint better, you get painting prize! You play better, you get playing prize! No the biggest a-hole!? YOU GET SPORTSMANSHIP PRIZE!!!!!!

Ahhh, life is so simple and sweet.

I was just going to post something like this, glad I read to the end of the thread.

This is the biggest issue that I see with tournaments - not any sportsmanship score etc, or comp score. Its Best Overall. But does getting rid of it make life any easier?

The issue I see here is what if you get people who go nuts about getting Best General anyway, and so will do ANYTHING to win the game? I mean, they can act like an ass, go slow, whatever, just to win, and now sportsmanship doesn't affect them will their behavior really improve? There needs to be an incentive for some people to act in a social manner.


The only solution I see is having a game check +, check or check minus that sums up whether the person is a fair player, reasonable, prepared, honest etc. Basically, just a bunch of tickboxes. You end up on a positive? Get +1 or +2 points depending on how far you go. You end up with a negative? -1 or -2 for bad cases. This could affect someone enough over 5 games to win or cost them 1 spot, but only if they really are shocking, or indeed are a lovely person. Most people should end up on neutral or a slight positive, which should even out across everyone.

You could even directly proscribe what people were judging - I mean, maybe check for army list for opponent, check for rules/tapemeasure/dice, check for a soft 'social' aspect during the game, check for a few others. Not a 'feeling' score for all of it, in other words. That way, if someone gives you a check minus for preparedness, but you can prove you have all of your gear with you, etc, army list, game started on time and all that, you can say 'well, check it out' etc and have it revoked, or modified by the judges.

Lords2001, how is that any different from the broken checklist method of sportsmanship scoring that already exists, and already gets gamed by the very people that create a "need" for it in the first place? You're proposing the exact same system that already exists, but instead of calling a 5/10 score +5 you call it +0, a 0/10 is called -2, 10/10 called +2 and so on. 1 point is often all it takes to differentiate between first place and second. The point still stands that the solution to people being dishonest jerks is not to give them the power to be even bigger dishonest jerks.

I personally monitor the tournaments while they're going on, and I'm on hand to mediate disputes during the game. Also, I do not tolerate any disrespect to the venue or anyone in it. If a player is acting rude towards a judge or another player, they get a warning. There is no second warning, only ejection from the tournament and a forfeiture of your entry fees.

That being said, I have never had to eject someone from a tourney for cheating or being rude, etc. I have had to issue a few warnings, some soft, some hard, but as the owner of the venue and also a member of the local gaming community, everyone has a pretty good idea how to conduct themselves.

Also, in terms of battle strategy and such in regards to stalling (unintentional or otherwise), it is considered poor tactics to construct and/or play an army whose goal is to run out the tourney timer by turn 3...if you don't know how to organize and move 60 Termagaunts a turn, you should not have brought that many. POOR TACTICAL PLANNING!

Players are notified in advance that the rounds are timed, and that a failure to complete a specific number of turns before that time runs out has penalties to your battle score.

And yes, we do have something similar to the checks/minuses thing as well. When players are filling out post-battle reports, a lot of the questions they will need to answer actually contain the data for many of the prize categories.

I don't think there can really be a 'scorecard' for something as abstract as sportsmanlike conduct, I think it must simply be judged by everyone who has to play against a person in a tournament, and maybe even the onlookers, who all get a secret ballot on whether the guy was a jerk or not. How do you think army creation should effect a 'sportsmanship' award either though? If you stack an army, that's kind of unsporting even before you start playing.

Players are notified in advance that the rounds are timed, and that a failure to complete a specific number of turns before that time runs out has penalties to your battle score.

How do you choose which player to penalize? I'd be pissed if I played an Ork player who slowed down my normally very quick games and then lost points because of something I had no control over to begin with.

I dont think that it should be like something that should put you in the top three if you lost alot but should be something in tounaments on the side because its cool to be recognized as a nice guy I won best sprotmanship twice and its a great feeling to win a box set for being a nice guy.

Sometimes it's as simple as the other player telling me that his opponent is taking too long for his turns either during or after the game.

Usually I go around to every table every half hour or so to check on the progress of the games, so I can usually tell when certain matches are lagging and I can git their buns in gear.

Keep in mind, the fact that there is a known penalty for stalling/running out of time is enough to keep even the most obstinate armies moving at a brisk pace. If your strategy is to run down the turn clock, you will not win the battle prize, the math won't allow it.

Getting rid of Best Overall is a good idea, but the problem is that GW requires it for GTs. The Best Overall award is to choose who goes to Vegas.

MorbidlyObeseMonkey wrote:Getting rid of Best Overall is a good idea, but the problem is that GW requires it for GTs. The Best Overall award is to choose who goes to Vegas.

TBH, I like Best Overall as Battle + Paint, but that's just me.

bah... all these "best this" and "best that" kind of seem like a bunch of guys patting each other on the back about this or that. Best overall just makes it a matter of scoring, and the tourney scores, just like the game, are often arbitrary and questionable. Why don't you just have one prize for "who was the most fun to play against?", but barring that, maybe a bingo game afterwards for who gets the free box set. Too bad gamers tend towards the anal-retentive rulesy bickery whiney people when things don't go their way, but that just proves my point! Argueing about sportsmanship points is a fairly obvious contradiction. Setting up a system by which they can be measured is doubly so.

jbunny wrote:When ever someone scores a low sportsmanship in a game I talk to both players seperately and ask if there were any issues in the game. If the player can not give a valid reason on why they tanked someones score, I penalize them. I also average out the tanked players other scores and replace that with the lower score. This is clear at the start of the tournament so my players need to know if they are going to give a low score they better have a reason for it.

So wait...

Let me see if I got this straight.

You arbitrarily replace arbitrary scores because someone's arbitrary reason was to arbitrary to you?

And you call that fair? That an arbitrary system produces arbitrary results?

Let me get my tinfoil hat and some popcorn. This should be good.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Janthkin wrote:The underlying question is: how do you keep people from chipmunking?

If that's a major concern, I suggest that people that feel that way never, ever leave their living place.

Ever.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Green Blow Fly wrote:But the guy who was faster might have had a false start.

And this has to do with what concerning this discussion?