Jejima

Guess Kisenosato's Aite rule discussion

Recommended Posts

Hi all!

As promised, here is the thread to discuss the rules regarding making picks with 'alternative options'.

It has been fairly long established practice for players going away for a few days to put in 'droning' line ups along the lines of...

day 10 - rikishi A
day 11 - rikishi B (unless already picked on day 10, then rikishi A)

etc

Are we all okay with that? Or does that need reviewing too?

The problem which arose from this basho was making picks with options, if a rikishi were to be declared absent from the basho *before* the entry deadlinepassed, while some players were in a difficult time zone, or had other plans.

So, to discuss how we deal with this in future - the picks for days 1 and 2 - please can the regular players of the game let me know how they feel....

1. Strongly feel that it should be like this past basho:  "If Hakuho is declared absent before the deadline, then my alternative choice is..."

2. Strongly feel that no should 'if' options should be allowed for picking days 1 and 2.

3. Have no strong feelings either way.

Please also give reasons for the suggestion, so we can all understand the position that you are taking.

I go to the UK in two weeks time for a long holiday (coming back in February) - and hope to have this decided before then.

Many thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the interests of inclusivity, I'd prefer option 1.  If that makes a whole bunch of people sad, then I guess it's not more inclusive and I'd be disappointed but content with the decision.

People have lives.  I'd like to accommodate them.  (Also sleep.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the discussion seems to be in favour of 1 or 3. As 3 is basically an 'abstention', I think we continue to play as we did the past basho.... :-)

Edited by Jejima

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just poking my head in after the "discussion" to say that I don't care one bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/12/2018 at 14:51, Ryoshishokunin said:

Maybe wait until the ramp-up to next basho? I assume a bunch of people don't pay attention in the in-between times.

Now's your chance!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎06‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 09:11, Jejima said:

Well the discussion seems to be in favour of 1 or 3. As 3 is basically an 'abstention', I think we continue to play as we did the past basho.... :-)

I will not go intai like Gernobono, but I wonder about this decision.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that that's that and we've determined that this game is srs bsns , I'd like to talk about a slight tweak to the Yusho tiebreaker rules that I think makes sense. 

Right now, the first tie-breaker is whether you were right on senshuraku, the next is if you were right on Day 14, and so on back to the beginning of the tournament.  If there are two players that are 2 points ahead of the field on senshuraku, then the one that is in position to win on tiebreaks can force a win by picking the same as the person behind on tiebreaks.  The fact that all picks are made openly makes this possible, so we could just go to secret submissions on senshuraku if there are two people two points ahead of the field.  My idea, consistent with how picks are made currently, is to punish the person with the better tiebreaker if they make the same pick as the other player after the other player does so and the guess turns out to be wrong.  So the specific scenario is:

1) Two players are 2 points or more ahead of everyone else after Day 14
2) The person with the better tiebreaker makes the same pick as the person with the worse tiebreaker
3) The person with the better tiebreaker makes their pick later in time than the person with the worse tiebreaker
4) The pick is wrong.

In that situation, I believe the Yusho should go to the person who by the current system has the worse tiebreaker, as the player with the better tiebreaker engineered it such that they would automatically win, and cannot defend themselves by saying they simply made the right pick.

Now, it's possible to simplify things slightly by making the new tiebreaker a bit more inclusive than that particular scenario.  A relatively simple rule that covers the above case is "If all players tied for the lead after senshuraku were wrong on senshuraku, the first tiebreaker is first submitted (final) senshuraku pick".  This has slightly wider applicability, as it might apply if all the leaders were wrong with different picks, there would be potentially more than 2 involved, and there would be no requirement that they be ahead by 2 going into senshuraku - it would simply require all the players one behind to also be wrong.  It would potentially bias things slightly more towards making a first pick rather than being right, as often senshuraku is a bit of a lottery, and that bias is a potential problem because of Time Zones and the ability to pick for senshuraku speculatively even before the Day 14 matches are announced, which kinda goes against the basic nature of the game (as people told me when I was playing this game similar to a pre-basho game).  So I can see arguments that the rule only makes sense in the specific scenario in which the current rules are abused the most, which means it has a lot of complications to it and thus makes it an overly specific rule.  In the case that this rule is deemed too complicated, I suggest that in the basic scenario of 2 players 2 or more ahead after Day 14 that they be asked to make picks privately to a third party.

I don't think it's necessary to do this for days before the last, as if you know that you can't just match every day including senshuraku to guarantee victory, there's no reason to go out of your way to do it before senshuraku.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While it's commendable to know the reasoning, that is  whole lot of text that I had to read three times and I'm still unsure of what the final ruling is.
Why not just summarize your suggestion in clear terms?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, orandashoho said:

While it's commendable to know the reasoning, that is  whole lot of text that I had to read three times and I'm still unsure of what the final ruling is.
Why not just summarize your suggestion in clear terms?

Agreed - @Gurowake please summarise your suggestion for the rule change into a couple of sentences (we can refer back to your longer post for the explanation, if need be).

NB: Any possible changes to the yusho tie-breaker for this game will not come into effect until March 2019, at the earliest.

Edited by Jejima

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After more thought, I realized that it's not just a problem when there are two people two ahead, but when only two people can win and if they were to pick the same person, one of them would be guaranteed a win.  My solution to the problem I brought up works only for the previously-concieved problem, and not for ones where they have different numbers of points after Day 14.  Thus I shall fall back to what I really think the solution should be to begin with:

If only two players can win the Yusho after Day 14, they make their picks privately to a third person, most likely Jejima or Jakusotsu, but if those were the two people involved, we'll pick someone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now