| |
BGonline.org Forums
More from Erik on GE
Posted By: mamabear In Response To: More from Erik on GE (Matt Cohn-Geier)
Date: Monday, 28 May 2007, at 6:28 p.m.
This answers a question I've had about this case from the start...what was Erik's nick that was there often enough to win the kind of money in question? OK, I have seen koule11 over there in the past. I almost never saw AlonsoLuis, the nick he mentioned in earlier posts. That proves nothing, of course, since I'm not there 24/7 and am in a time zone a few hours phase shifted from Denmark. I also had been away from the BBs at the time these posts began, and so didn't have an opportunity to bring up this question at the inception.
I don't play for high stakes, and so probably never played with either of these nicks. But I have always watched games frequently, and so am aware of who comes and goes. This is why I wondered about the question of the other nick. I've never questioned that Erik is good enough to win money legitimately; I've played with him at the Grid and his error rates in the three matches in *my* archives were 4.042(M5), 2.895(M5), and 3.353(M1).
Another question in my mind: If games are to be "investigated", wouldn't it be better to collect the files from all three possible sources (player, opponent, and the server itself) and make sure they match up? For those unfamiliar with Play65/GE, the files are stored in JellyFish .mat and .gam format, easy to change. I doubt very much that Erik would edit the requested files, but if I were Play65/GE, before I made an accusation I'd be rummaging around in those cyber-archives even if it did take some time.
Why the records are so elusive: Another difference between Play65/GE and FIBS or the Grid is that when you watch a game or match at Play65/GE, you can't electronically record it. This means, for good or ill, that no spectator can produce any original record other than an inadmissable handwritten scrawl.
I think it would be a big improvement there to permit spectator recording. The high-stake games and matches most likely to be "investigated" also tend to draw numerous watchers, which would make electronic records easier to come by. Spectators might also be able to provide subjective impressions (of time spent per move, for example), since at least some of us add notes to our Snowie files about anything that interests us about the games we play or watch.
(As an aside with no relevance to the main question, another reason I want spectator recording to be permitted is that I've seen some exciting world-class matches there, but had to Snowie key positions from just memory and hastily recorded pip counts. This means they may be wrong, and so are un-postable and un-publishable; a purist might even argue they're also unusable.)
But back to the issue at hand: I'm sure most of us would be more than happy to listen to both sides of this case, but from the looks of things, we're not going to get the opportunity.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.