AREA : a small info

ecz

Partisan Captain
Joined
Aug 31, 2003
Messages
4,284
Reaction score
392
Location
Italy
Country
llItaly
probably my English is so bad that people find things I never said in my post, for example the laughable idea the TD are a special class of ASLer.

Really fun assertion.

I never mentioned ASLOK that is a very peculiar event that probably goes out of control of the TD itself, where players arrange their games in autonomy and possibly without any notice . Amazingly it is a event where results and all details of the games are invisible to the mass and the main billboard is hand written . All these characteristics, that are the fruit of a deliberate choice, obviusly make hard for the TD record any game for AREA purposes, so I understand difficulties.
About WO I know even less (is there any place where the results are recorded ?) so I have no idea if someone manages the event as tipycally a TD should. But I cannot believe that lacks any written track of what people play at least in the minis and in the main event.
But I could be wrong.

The two said events could be exceptions, but I wonder: why is so impossible that one willing partecipant, among the hundreds, keeps track (with the assent of the TD) of all games played in the various competitive events ? This same guy could send the data to AREA once they are clean and ordered

in any case what I would do as AREA keeper remains unchanged for the reasons I said above that are eminently practical.
Fortunately it is not my aspiration become the AREA keeper
 

ecz

Partisan Captain
Joined
Aug 31, 2003
Messages
4,284
Reaction score
392
Location
Italy
Country
llItaly
I think Enrico's point was mostly about an attempt to avoid confusion and reduce the workload rather than to argue for anything special about a tournament director. As someone who himself deals with what is surely a rather chaotic communication stream I suspect he is especially attuned to that challenge.
exactly, so my English is not that bad?
 

Justiciar

Elder Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
4,685
Reaction score
1,287
Location
Within Range
Country
llUnited States
TD should not be the SOLE recorded of matches.

I agree that event matches (WO, ASLOK, ASO, VASL league, Albany, Double One, Berserk, Lille, Grenadier etc) are the only sanctioned matches. But NOT TDs this madness. You according them status outside the immediate running of he event which is not accorded to ROAR or Archive as if then a tourney result aside from W-L rates more...

We police and understand and know who are true ASLers amongst ourselves or we are nothing...AREA , ROAR means nothing it is all lies.... People wake up!

Effectively we are saying that only Pleva, Sheppard, Siemsen, Kwan, etc., are qualified to report matches... Really? Really? What a shame, what a shame...
 
Last edited:

ecz

Partisan Captain
Joined
Aug 31, 2003
Messages
4,284
Reaction score
392
Location
Italy
Country
llItaly
TD should not be the SOLE recorded of matches.

I agree that event matches (WO, ASLOK, ASO, VASL league, Albany, Double One, Berserk, Lille, Grenadier etc) are the only sanctioned matches. But NOT TDs this madness. You according them status outside the immediate running of he event which is not accorded to ROAR or Archive as if then a tourney result aside from W-L rates more...

We police and understand and know who are true ASLers amongst ourselves or we are nothing...AREA , ROAR means nothing it is all lies.... People wake up!

Effectively we are saying that only Pleva, Sheppard, Siemsen, Kwan, etc., are qualified to report matches... Really? Really? What a shame, what a shame...
Again, I never said what you are arguing. Exactly where I fail ?
Pleva can delegate even Chuck the drunk from Zed's in Licoln (NE) to send results to AREA, if he's too busy.

I'm saying that - as AREA keeper- I would ask to have all results in a single bite and in a single file because I simply would not accept partial results coming in random order possibly two (or three) times from a moltitude of subjects playing in the same event when the TD (or a delegate) can facilitate the work of the AREA keeper.
The less are the subjects with whom the AREA keeper is in contact for registration data the better.

The flow of data is already massive. If the data are not ordered, polished, and written according a standard format allowing a quick registration it becomes a daunting task .
This or the new AREA keeper will be overwhelmed by work.
 

Justiciar

Elder Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
4,685
Reaction score
1,287
Location
Within Range
Country
llUnited States
You are again missing the point.

The point is: TDs are NOT the only means to report AREA. End of story.
 

Justiciar

Elder Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
4,685
Reaction score
1,287
Location
Within Range
Country
llUnited States
We are not a community if TD are the only means of AREA.

Likewise pleas about "I can't handle input from two sources from the tourney" That is a tech issue, and shame on the tech code. Not the players. When I play a game that goes to ROAR I ask "shall I report or you?" Whatever the answer I respect that answer. So in the case of a tourney maybe the answer war "my opponent says I will report it." Ok 3 months later the report is not up...ask mu opponent "hey could you post that playing from X tourney."..3 months later still to report I file it myself.

AREA keeper has to be prepared and accept self reports...and scenarios like the above...otherwise AREA is just a special preserve for motivated TDs and tourneys of certain size and so forth on so on...which means AREA is less that what to claims to be...less that what TD think it is for their tourney and so on.

We either trust each other here or we don't. That is the crux of the matter.

Stop trying to pretend TD have special powers! Who assigned them that? No one.

That only tournaments in the broad sense who matter for AREA is NOT* under question here.

That the keeper of AREA feels a burden b/c me and Joe both report the same game...boo-hooo. That part and parcel of your burden, for which I owe you a beer or two..as do we all. But I BET technology can prevent such a clash.
 

Stewart

Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2006
Messages
1,107
Reaction score
56
Location
California
Country
llUnited States
I think that the ideal solution would be a join between ROAR and AREA, an automatic system in which the calculation of the AREA coefficient takes place through the games registered by the players itself. In this manner the workload of the system administrator would be much much smaller than manually loading all the results of all the ASL tournaments in the world.
This would seem to be a logical step as the number of players seems to be growing.
Seems like a template for the operation wouldn't be that severe.
 

Perry

Elder Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2003
Messages
1,304
Reaction score
930
Location
Baltimore, MD
Country
llUnited States
ASLOK that is a very peculiar event that probably goes out of control of the TD itself, where players arrange their games in autonomy and possibly without any notice . Amazingly it is a event where results and all details of the games are invisible to the mass and the main billboard is hand written . All these characteristics, that are the fruit of a deliberate choice, obviusly make hard for the TD record any game for AREA purposes, so I understand difficulties.
About WO I know even less (is there any place where the results are recorded ?) so I have no idea if someone manages the event as tipycally a TD should. But I cannot believe that lacks any written track of what people play at least in the minis and in the main event.
But I could be wrong.
Winter Offensive is like ASLOK, only less organized.
 

boylermaker

Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2012
Messages
275
Reaction score
120
Location
Virginia
Country
llUnited States
Not a big AREA user, but I side with Enrico pretty strongly here. Two of his points in particular really stood out to me:

It's important to have the results submitted in a single batch (by whomever) because people who did well are probably more likely to self-report than people who didn't. This seems like a pretty plausible self-reporting scenario: I go 4-1, I'm excited about going on a great run, and I self-report right away because I want to see my AREA bump. At the next tournament, I go 1-4, am a little bummed out, tell myself, "hey, I'll do it tomorrow; now I'm gonna have a beer", and then forget to do it tomorrow and through no bad faith never actually self-report. I know I'm always more excited to update ROAR when I win than when I lose.

This means that people who aren't conscientious about it will look like they have better records than they do; whereas the people who are really responsible and always self-report whatever their record will look worse in comparison. Doesn't seem fair to me.

There's also the double-posting-results problem. As several people have noted, you can come up with a technological solution to this pretty easily. But the technological solution is something like "look for scenarios that were played by the same opponents on the same day and were the same scenario name". That means that all that info has to be entered--not just players and winner, but date and scenario, so you've just doubled the workload for whomever is doing the reporting.

Maybe my day job (in data analysis) has made me more persnickety than I should, but I'd much rather have @ecz's system, where fewer results are submitted, but in full-tournament-units, than the chaos of self-reporting.
 

Justiciar

Elder Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
4,685
Reaction score
1,287
Location
Within Range
Country
llUnited States
Not a big AREA user, but I side with Enrico pretty strongly here. Two of his points in particular really stood out to me:

It's important to have the results submitted in a single batch (by whomever) because people who did well are probably more likely to self-report than people who didn't. This seems like a pretty plausible self-reporting scenario: I go 4-1, I'm excited about going on a great run, and I self-report right away because I want to see my AREA bump. At the next tournament, I go 1-4, am a little bummed out, tell myself, "hey, I'll do it tomorrow; now I'm gonna have a beer", and then forget to do it tomorrow and through no bad faith never actually self-report. I know I'm always more excited to update ROAR when I win than when I lose.

This means that people who aren't conscientious about it will look like they have better records than they do; whereas the people who are really responsible and always self-report whatever their record will look worse in comparison. Doesn't seem fair to me.

There's also the double-posting-results problem. As several people have noted, you can come up with a technological solution to this pretty easily. But the technological solution is something like "look for scenarios that were played by the same opponents on the same day and were the same scenario name". That means that all that info has to be entered--not just players and winner, but date and scenario, so you've just doubled the workload for whomever is doing the reporting.

Maybe my day job (in data analysis) has made me more persnickety than I should, but I'd much rather have @ecz's system, where fewer results are submitted, but in full-tournament-units, than the chaos of self-reporting.
You just called into the question the integrity of every ASLer.

Also note I am not advocating for a system where I actually enter my data (i.e. not like a ROAR system), but that my data from ASLOK/WO, or whatever tourney, can be handed/e-mailed to "Keeper X" and Keeper X will accept that data. As noted upstream this is a community, and community that either knows the person, or knows the person that is the person. You cheat here in this world your name is mud. Good luck getting a game. We are among friends. Bruno accepted such data. That should continue. AREA is self checking in that both OPFOR can see that the game reported is properly so. If I look my record I see, the game we played, you can do likewise at your record, and yup we see it is properly reported. Thus a reporter cannot fudge the stats.

Furthermore Enrico has failed to take into the unique nature of both ASLOK and WO which won't get an effective "1 Party" reporting pathway. I believe an EXC is required for these 2 particular events. I have noted upstream that all the other tourneys are of a size that the TD can manage the reporting task, as thankless as that task is. At the ASLOK and WO level it becomes monstrous.

Third there are those of us who only make it to "other" tournaments once in a blue moon, but who do attend ASLOK/WO semi-regularly to regularly. Thus the only way these folk can have a chance at a non-baseline rating at a seeded "other" tournament is b/c there is ASLOK/WO data in the system.

Fourth, it has been mentioned before in other threads, the idea that if you are not active (EX play in a tourney with 5? years) you are removed from the list, but if you come back on your old data is used with the new to "reactivate."

Fifth, there have been ASLers who have past away, the new AREA should remove their names. Or have their names with a * and show their last held rank, but that rating would not create a real "seed."
 

Jacometti

Elder Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
3,455
Reaction score
1,083
Location
Halifax, NS
Country
llCanada
You just called into the question the integrity of every ASLer.

Also note I am not advocating for a system where I actually enter my data (i.e. not like a ROAR system), but that my data from ASLOK/WO, or whatever tourney, can be handed/e-mailed to "Keeper X" and Keeper X will accept that data. As noted upstream this is a community, and community that either knows the person, or knows the person that is the person. You cheat here in this world your name is mud. Good luck getting a game. We are among friends. Bruno accepted such data. That should continue. AREA is self checking in that both OPFOR can see that the game reported is properly so. If I look my record I see, the game we played, you can do likewise at your record, and yup we see it is properly reported. Thus a reporter cannot fudge the stats.

Furthermore Enrico has failed to take into the unique nature of both ASLOK and WO which won't get an effective "1 Party" reporting pathway. I believe an EXC is required for these 2 particular events. I have noted upstream that all the other tourneys are of a size that the TD can manage the reporting task, as thankless as that task is. At the ASLOK and WO level it becomes monstrous.

Third there are those of us who only make it to "other" tournaments once in a blue moon, but who do attend ASLOK/WO semi-regularly to regularly. Thus the only way these folk can have a chance at a non-baseline rating at a seeded "other" tournament is b/c there is ASLOK/WO data in the system.

Fourth, it has been mentioned before in other threads, the idea that if you are not active (EX play in a tourney with 5? years) you are removed from the list, but if you come back on your old data is used with the new to "reactivate."

Fifth, there have been ASLers who have past away, the new AREA should remove their names. Or have their names with a * and show their last held rank, but that rating would not create a real "seed."
Like your suggestions here, but please don't remove my name after I pass away. I would like to be ranked for as long as this game lasts. Which I hope will be several centuries more.
 

von Marwitz

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
9,515
Reaction score
2,687
Location
Kraut Corner
Country
llGibraltar
Great idea! I think I will have my ASL set redone in terra cotta.

JR
I am afraid, JR, that ship has sailed loooong ago:

7830

Most of the unwashed masses are not aware that the above, crafted in the 4th millenium B.C., is the representation of an unpunched German 5-4-8 Platoon along with a 9-1 Leader and a healthy smattering of SW as part of a then very futuristic war game.

My great-grandfather brought this home when he was involved building the Berlin-Baghdad railway back in the days.

7831

That's what brought me into ASL.

von Marwitz
 
Last edited:

Justiciar

Elder Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
4,685
Reaction score
1,287
Location
Within Range
Country
llUnited States
Again: at ASLOK each year Bret takes all player files and bind them. It is these yearly reports that he sent to Bruno, last year done seems to be 2011.
Again, you make my point for me. You are not the TD. Some one else, i.e. you submitted the reports. Which means for those who deem "security" as the paramount concern...ie only the TD can submit reports (Tread be trusted) we have evidence that a third party courier actually does the submitting. Thus there is loss of "control". Which is what the only TD camp is all about.

Further. I have left reports in the pile at ASLOK and never got those results submitted.

Again, I make the point that for ASLOK and WO self-reporting is the only way to assure entries. All the other tourneys are of a size that the TD can handle the onerous chore or reporting, but ASLOK and WO are back breaking in their scope.
 
Top