My turn.
Not to be very proud as 1k to win against a 5k.
Ladder game won by timeout after 14 moves or so.
All seems correct (result in bright green) but i didn’t get even 1 point more of rating? Is it possible?
Here’s the game:
Checking my opponent profile, he just had a string of timeout but then a rated win. When is the mass timeout effect canceled?
Off-topic but I recognize that lower-right joseki from yesterday’s josekle! I had a few conversations about it because I had never seen it before (neither had most of my friends) so it really stuck with me. Funny to see it in the wild.
But anyways I was under the impression that games have to be a certain length before counting as rated, is this wrong?
Last i heard was 6 moves.
He he, for the joseki, it’s pure coincidence on my side.
I think when he wants to play.
I think mass timeout is not rated iirc (although a win against 4 stones weaker would be negligible anyway)
Confirmation:
Groin’s opponent is gojac 5k.
According to the page https://online-go.com/termination-api/player/740450/v5-rating-history, gojac’s correspondence game against Bar was rated, since it was the first in a series of timeouts, but all subsequent correspondence games were either won or lost by timeout, so were annulled.
Anyway Groin wouldn’t have earned many rating points after winning against a 5k. Last time I won against a 5k my rating went from 1935.88 to 1938.81 (+2.93).
He had a mass timeout i know that, but then, terminated with 4 games including wins.
So my question remains, when the mass timout effect stops?
The mass timeout stops when he will finish a correspondence game (resignation or counting).
Ok I see. He can still come play and win live and let his corr games run out… And his last won corr game was because his opponent timeout before him.
I just noticed this thread, and I think you got the wrong information. The correspondence timeout rule ends when any game is completed, because the rule pertains only to serial correspondence timeouts (unless it has been changed recently). The purpose of the rule is to accommodate rare life events (like being hospitalized), so it would be idiotic if a live game didn’t count for ending the string, since the life emergency would obviously be over.
I think the confusion is because it formerly required a finished correspondence game to get the “timeout” tag removed from under a person’s avatar. In other words, a person had to demonstrate that they could complete a correspondence game without timing out. This is entirely separate from the effective annulling of serial timeouts after the first one is counted. I believe that tag is no longer being used because it was very buggy and there were a lot of complaints about not being able to get rid of it.
As to your question, it looks like your game did not count because it was the second in a new string of serial correspondence timeouts, even though the game against UnderStudy was apparently so short it got auto-annulled. You should check to see whether your opponent has a history of serial correspondence timeouts. If so, you should report him.
thx for your concern. That’s too confusing now for me to get the mechanism here then. Nevermind.
Are you sure? I looked again at gojac’s game history. The most recent games are against
According to the page https://online-go.com/termination-api/player/740450/v5-rating-history, the most two recent rated games are the ones against myw and thisiscc.
Why was the game gojac-PopcornCzar not rated? This game doesn’t belong to a series of timeout of PopcornCzar, you can check in PopcornCzar’s history that the game gojac-PopcornCzar followed a live game PopcornCzar-Clawhammer Mike that was won by resignation.
