How does blacklisting affect tournaments?

If one adds a player to his blacklist, what happens if that player joins the same tournament? Will the system keep the two players apart, or will the blacklisted player win the tournament games by default because the other player will never see the games? For that matter, what would happen if there are already games underway with the blacklisted player? Same thing?

On the Login/New user --> Blacklist page it says you will not receive any messages from blacklisted players. It does not say you will not play any games with them.

David,

I understand that, but it also does not say whether the messages that one will not see are game notices. It all depends upon Rio's interpretation and how he coded the system. I'm just looking for clarification of what I have already read, which includes the page you mentioned.

Thanks,

--Rob

Maybe there was better description in the forum. You can find it or try with some voluntary what blacklist exactly does.

I think blacklist block person send you messages, that means:

- that person can't invite you

- you can start game against blacklisted in Waiting room it doesn't need send you message

- you can play tournament with that person, there are also no messages

- you can get messages from server about games againsted blacklisted

- Waiting room games start when they're accepted, tourney games when tourney starts. Both appear on your game list without any message.

- game is not a message

All of above is what I think I didn't study it

Thanks, Linda. If that actually IS the case, it falls short of what I seek. I wish to block games as well. Simply stated, if one enters a tournament, one sometimes gets paired up with players who really should not be in the same bracket, but who actually have a better rating because of all the other player's opponents who appear to have defaulted their games just because they didn't want to waste their time either. Such a player, despite moves that anyone with one week's experience would know not to make, claims to have several years of experience and refuses to resign at any time. If one resigns or defaults in games with such a player, ones own rating suffers while the other player's increases, futher inflating the other player's self-evaluation.

Given the situation, stopping messages wouldn't help, because the other player doesn't send any anyway.

If i understand you right, labrador, you mean a single player should be banned (by everybody has she on the blacklist) from tournaments? I am clearly against this.

We are here to play. I too have a game against an opponent who makes silly moves, refuses to resign and i think the game will go on in this manner for month. Its annoying, thats right, but not a reason for banning. And after all, clicking on the pass-button doesnt take too much time.

labradors, is this person HOT_SYNC_KAREN ? :-)))

If players were allowed to ban games against certain opponents, it would throw a spanner into the entire automated tournament system. How fair would it be to the other players in that tournament, who do play this opponent?

It sounds like you are talking about Go. I don't know of any other game where not resigning can delay the end of the game so much. But even that game must end eventually. You will get your win with patience.

BTW Libor Janda's name is not Linda... ;-)

There is another way this could matter -- some people prefer not to play against computer opponents. I help Inge Wallin with his Molpadia program, which is playing amazons here; we would not want to force anyone to play against the program if they didn't want to, but at the same time we would like to enter it ratings tournaments. So, letting those players add Molpadia to their blacklist would be a convenient solution.

I think computer programs should stay out of tournaments.

Letting players have the possibility to select which players they want to/not want to meet is opening possibilities which is not wanted.

bump