Some comments about Four in a Row

Hi, I am one of the top players in Four in a Row here, and there are three issues I would like to bring forth:

1. The algorithm to decide who goes first needs to be more fixed instead of random. As it stands right now, if you play two rated games against someone, you can still go first twice or go second twice, which is unfair. It should be fixed at one first and one second. Because in this game (and in other games I'm sure) going either first or second is a HUGE advantage. In FIR, if I am going first against someone rated 2200+ I am probably losing at least 90-95% of the time, and likewise if I am playing second, I will also win at least that often.

2. Similar point as above, but has to do with the championships. The championships have become mostly luck to win because they often end up with an even number of players, which means you play an odd number of games. For example, if there are 10 players, some players will play second 5 times and first 4 times, while some will play first 5 times and first 4 times. This makes it too much luck because as I mentioned earlier, it is very hard to beat someone who is going second.

3. The top 10 players or so rarely lose when going second, as they are basically perfect players. This makes the games boring and mostly luck (to see who gets to play second the most). The best way to remedy this is to introduce new board sizes to the game, just like Go, Gomoku, Reversi, etc. I recommend a board size with different rules (e.g. 8x7) or something big, like 10x10. 7x6 and 7x7 are not good choices as they already have programs that can play perfectly.

Thanks for your time!

Hello,

I agree that this is not just to be double yellow, just like being twice red. As also said to championships if an even number of players so some will be red 5 times and 4 times more than red. This disadvantage players. But there are also other handicaps as if a player is 5 times against 5 red 4 times stronger and yellow against four weak and once against a yellow box. It is more likely to have 9/10 that a person who is 3 times red against the weak and red 2 times stronger and cons of 1 times 1 small yellow against yellow and 4 times against 4 strong. A chance to have won will be 6/10 ... There should be going back and forth with for each player. At least he don 'have no luck or misfortune of being red and yellow against weak against the strong. And there will be more part to play, so more fun!

There are programs for "10x10 and 7x7"?

No, it is program for 7x6 and 7x7.

I suggest 8x7 or 10x10 is a good board size for littlegolem!

I have always thought that it would be nice to have a double round robin for the top section of the four in a row championship (maybe other games, too). That would make it much more of a true contest for the top and remove any of the luck factors involved in pairings. However, chance of this or any other change is a long shot....

I don't see any record of you ever participating in any double round robin tournaments:
http://www.littlegolem.net/jsp/info/player_trn_list.jsp?gtid=fir&plid=25877
Where are these mytical cases where you played yellow twice?

I think he'd referring to the waiting room games for playing yellow twice.

Anyways for the championship, I really do think it would be a really neat idea to implement something like a double round robin for not only for four in a row, but for other games as well like chess/reversi/others to eliminate the luck factor.

I like the mode like it is. To have a bit luck in the schedule opens the contention to a wider range of players. This is just a bit more fun to watch. Yes, I love following championship games of leagues where I, myself, am too weak to compete in the first league.

To play two games against every opponent would set up new issues like symmetric play...

In the game where I am in the run for the titels I also love the challange. All have an advantage for the starting player.

Tobi

Yes, the double red or double yellow I am referring to is in regards to games in the waiting room, not tournament. To me it is foremost important to make skill the determining factor in a tournament, especially a championship, where it is supposed to determine the best player. Having such an unbalance of red/yellow games to me defeats the purpose of the championship entirely, because it is more luck based than skill.

Another issue I have is with the rating system in general. It is recently the case that some people in Four in a Row (you know who you are) have been purposely making a multitude of new names to boost their own rating or purposely drop the rating of a higher rated opponent. The only way to avoid this right now is to avoid playing in monthly cups entirely, but any solution that lowers activity is not a good solution at all. Instead, it would be better if all players had a provisional rating as they do in some sites, for like the first 20 games or so, so that you don't lose as much to these fake newer players.

Ok that's all the issues I have for now. I'll bring more when I can think of some.

Yep, what the above said.

Did you just complain about multi-accounting..from your multi-account? And then tried to make it look like it's actually another person? :)

No, it's me. I just posted on the other name by accident so I voiced my agreement on this name.

I don't think multi accounts themselves are an issue, it just becomes an issue when you make one with the intent to purposely lower someone else's rating, which some players are doing now.

In the absense of what might have to be mind-bogglingly smart logic to avoid pessimal corner cases, the fairest thing to do is definitely to have each game 50/50 random. The probability of you benefitting from a draw is identical to the probability of it being to your detriment. In the long run, it's fair.

Compare ro-sham-bo optimal stategy.