You may even do it inconspicuously, in the form of an in-depth interview after the game ended. 
Go and GoT are only one letter difference… Who knows? 
3 Likes
I will resign from talking about this. The time can be better spent on studying/playing. I don’t want to stuck with 2ky for 10 years like this guy. 
2 Likes
Note that Montreal is not the only team with a professional player. I didn’t check all teams but here are a few others:
https://pandanet-igs.com/communities/agacityleague/teams/24/Vancouver
https://pandanet-igs.com/communities/agacityleague/teams/24/Chicago
https://pandanet-igs.com/communities/agacityleague/teams/24/Gr_Washington
3 Likes
1p/2p and 8p… So, if 8p lost, no way the 1p/2p would win against her, and if they did she would call for cheating?..
She obviously outranks absolutely everyone.
(see how easy it is to throw around things like that?)
I checked, because I’m gossipy. It’s a Danfest in there 
Other than a Dan team with a TPK captain (weird but funny), a brave SDK/DDK team (bless their hearts) and 3-4 high kyu-dan compos, the rest is mostly Dans. One 7p, and 4-5 teams with 1p/2p.
Professional ranks don’t work like this. A professional 9d is usually only about 1 or 2 stones stronger than a professional 1d in the same system.
Note that professional ranks are also not gained by being stronger, but by winning a certain quota of games. It’s certainly an achievement, but not based on the same thing as Elo ranking (for example) or the handicap system.
3 Likes
I don’t get the objection. She doesn’t outrank absolutely everyone? What is the “like this” that I said that it doesn’t work?
Even then, what is the objection really? Sure, there’s a professional in the team, but there’s profs in many teams, and apparently that’s allowed. Meanwhile, cheating with AI is not allowed, as is accusing of cheating.
I don’t see what the fact that an 8p is playing along has to do with this.
Oh no you don’t get to do that.
Either respond to something I said or admit that you responded to something that isn’t there.
You are saying “don’t work like this” against something I supposedly said and when I asked what that has to do with anything, you change targets. You can disagree with me but replying to things that aren’t there isn’t a good look. Do better.
I’m questioning whether she would accept a loss gracefully, or she takes for granted all other players would be easy wins, in the flippant way people accuse someone of cheating.
I was responding to you: you’re stating that a 1p vs 8p match is comparable to a 1k vs 6d match. It’s not: the first is a mattter of only a couple of stones in strength, the latter is 7 stones difference.
Hence your hypothetical dispute about an 8p losing to a 1p doesn’t make sense here.
And my “even then” was meant to state that someone obviously outranking everybody is not a problem. That’s what tournaments are for right?
How is this relevant? We don’t know how she reacts to losing, nor does it matter here. She’s not the one reacting badly to losing, right?
3 Likes
Professional ranks are not the same as regular dan ranks someone who is 1p can be stronger then someone who is 9p. I guess though if you think of “pure rank” 8p is definitely higher then 1p. But generally pro ranks don’t really mean much in difference you are either a pro, not pro, or a pro that won a title. the 1p, 2p, 3p and so on don’t really mean much.
Edit: the only pros I would make the 9p-1p difference argument are like Shin Jinseo and Xie ke but can we even call them humans? DEMONS I SAY!
She’s lost games in the league already. Against team L.A. at least IIRC.
Even among the amateur players, there’s quite a few that studied to become pro.
The point of an open is to have tournaments where pro can play without playing against the same 4-5 players repeatedly. Like in tennis for instance.
4 Likes
No I am not. Where did I say that?
I concluded that you were making a comparison to the current case from this sentence.
1 Like
IMO the difference may even be at least 7 stones. Rémi Campagnie is EGF 6 dan. His opponent was AGA 1k, this is not better than EGF 2k, so the strength difference is at least 7 stones. Unless the stronger player makes a big blunder like a self-atari, I don’t think he can ever lose against someone 7 stones weaker, unless they improved dramatically.
On the other hand, a 1p can sometimes beat a 9p, for instance Ryan Li beat Chen Yaoye 9p a few years ago.
3 Likes
When her team lost, she made public accusations against another player, rather aggressively I might add (based on some replies from her on her FB post) questioning the tournament directors’ decision, with only the justification that it “doesn’t feel right”. It is not a definitive sign, but personally I think that wasn’t the best possible reaction in her part.
I have mentioned above what, IMHO, would have been a better reaction.
was a kind of sarcastic comment/ disclaimer, that it would be easy to label her a sore loser in a hypothetical scenario that a result wasn’t in her liking, based on my “feel”. That’s exactly why I added the parenthesis, but maybe it didn’t come across.
FTR, I don’t think pros in there are a problem, since it is obviously allowed and all participants know about it. Whatever the rules are, if they are clearly stated and agreed upon, they are legitimate. I would hope some Dans in there would offer a great challenge to the pros and that would make for beautiful fights.
I would suggest, next time she comes across a rule that isn’t strong enough against cheating, to state that she won’t participate. I would personally respect that reaction more. Caring about the game means she would care about all games being protected by cheaters, not making a fuss about it only when her team lost.
Also, as a captain and a seasoned pro, she should protect her team member from going over to FB to write a post (maybe I’m old and out of touch, though, SNS is a labyrinth of etiquette). She could shield him and come out and say “based on my professional experience and the advise of some pro friends, we disagree with AGA’s dismissal of our report for cheating. The game in dispute is this blahblahblah.link (yes people can find it anyway, but it’s classier to leave the other person out of it).
We will continue to the next round only if webcams are implemented OR
We resign from the tournament”.
I’m not saying I’m half as nice or competent, but I’m trying to showcase what I think would be a better response in the long term, a statement they can fall back onto with ease anytime in future discussions.
And I’m not even convinced 1k didn’t cheat, I can’t judge for myself and there are compelling arguments that he did*.
*I don’t know AGA’s reputation on such matters, I saw some FB comments that it could be a questionable decision.
tl;dr I’m not taking a side in the cheating issue, because it’s above me paygrade (which currently is zero, but you make me explain my jokes at this point 
). I’m saying I believe it was handled poorly and in a polarizing way.
At higher ranks the skill difference is usually less pronounced.
If I understand correctly, your argument is that accusing someone of cheating solely based on the fact that they won a go game versus a stronger opponent, is uncalled for. And if that is really the only reason for an accusation, I agree. But in this particular case, can you say with certainty that this is the only reason?
The only think that made a real impression on me was the 20 minutes clock time and that they kicked out the whole team. I am a bit surprised that such a thing was actuallly “in the rules” because it is actually a hardcore army trick, seen in marine unit training and stuff like that where the stakes are high and the rules are too many to practically enforce.
In order to avoid getting the higher ranking officers of the unit to strictly police each trainee/soldier and have them constantly under surveilance (which is harsh and strains the hierarchy, since it creates resentment towards the higher ranked officers), they use this psychological trick to turn every single soldier to a de-facto rule enforcer and watchdog of one another. 
If one fails, the team fails. With the stakes so high, everyone in the unit is literally on each other’s throat at the slightest sign of a mistake.
If someone pops-up and say that “hey it is in the rules” then I’ll just inform them beforehand that this exact response is also in the “playbook” of that tactic.
I’ll give you a real practical example.
In the army training for officers we had some very strict rules and especially in the morning we had to wake up, do our morning routines, make the beds and sheets immaculately flat, wax our boots, shave and be outside the building in ten minutes.
6:00 in the morning you wake up, 6:10 all these have to be ready or else
and here comes the magic:
Or else, you who did not manage it, suffered no consequences. Your colleagues that did manage it though and were already outside waiting, were ordered to drop and do push-ups until everyone got out and that could take a while. In the meantime the sargeant would shout loudly towards the building “come on, move it, your colleagues are suffering because of you” and of course, not because of the sargent that gave the order. “It was in the rules” he didn’t make them. He and us doing the push-ups, just follow the rules. We cannot resent the hierarchy. The rules were set beforehand.
But we sure hate the tardy sleepy blokeheads that broke the rules right now, and later we might have a “friendly” chat with them, which the sargeant will either pretend to not notice or artfully not be there to notice, and talk about how the tardy ones have to follow the rules or else…
A very hardcore trick, indeed.
Certainly not something fitting for a game tournament.
2 Likes
In the EYGTC 2017, cheating resulted in losing the match on the 5 boards, but just for one round and not for the rest of the competition:
1 Like
You asked 1ks, but I guess I’ll answer as well as a 1-2d. I would definitely have first thought about capturing the cutting stone at O12, but it’s hard in retrospect to know what I would have done. After seeing
an AI move, it’s sometimes obvious why it’s a good move, even though there’s no chance I would have thought of the move in my own game. But I don’t think it’s impossible for 1k to have judged N11 to be an overplay, since it’s deep-ish in black’s sphere of influence, and decided to try to punish by cutting it off.
Unfortunately, unless the cheater is playing every move from the AI, and unless you can find the settings used for that AI, it’s hard to have solid evidence.
I personally think that until we have more powerful tools for detecting cheaters, like the Chess world has, then we will have to err on the side of caution. It’s better to let 10 AI-cheats go than convict 1 innocent player. I have for awhile envisioned a system that would analyze the winrate graphs of all the games of a player and quantify their strength in a way independent from traditional ranking systems. You could compare game-quality for different periods of time of the suspected player against reference populations (players of their strength, players weaker and stronger, the average pro, top pros, and bots). Then, instead of relying on a feeling, we might be able to make quantitative statements like: “The probability of a player of strength Y of playing N games of average quality X is P.” Each tournament/server/organization can set their own confidence intervals in a transparent way.
8 Likes