The Future of Tough-It-Out
I considered making this post as a separate thread, but didn't want to distract from all the other great things going on in Community-Run Tourneys right now, so am just putting it in here along with this event.
By posting it, I'm hoping to offer some transparency around why I'm asking for the Club Proof, and why it matters to the integrity of these events.
I do realize it's an extra burden to take these screenshots, and that's why I'm trying to minimize what we're asking for, and why I'm providing examples and How-To videos to make it as easy as possible. If you are feeling grumpy about why we're asking for this level of proof, please read this post first to try and understand the pros and cons of the alternatives. And if you have a better suggestion of how I might run these events, please feel free to share it!
Thanks,
Corwyn
-------------------
The Problem:
WGT's restricted-club programming doesn't work properly. Back in spring 2015, various reports in each tournament that was set up indicated something was wrong. Shoe kindly set up a test for us, and a number of volunteers gave their time to help arrive at a diagnosis for WGT of where the flaws were.
Our findings were passed on but we're not confident right now (and nor is Shoe) that WGT will devote engineer time to fixing the issue (despite having put a lot of programming time into developing the feature in the first place).
The restricted-club settings are open to abuse, and it's pretty much public knowledge now (through so many postings in the tournament Forum threads) that anyone who wants to cheat can do so (and even how they can do it).
So, for these events to have a future, I have what I see as 4 choices in terms of how to run them:
1. Return to original Tough-It-Out method (from 2+ years ago) of playing as Multiplayer only, with sign-ups through the Forum thread.
Pros:
players play in twosomes and verify that each other is using the right clubs (although even this is theoretically open to abuse if two players collude).
Cons:
• many fewer entrants (i.e. 20-30, compared to 350-800+ approx through the Game Client tourney list).
• much, much more work for the organizer in setting up Time Availability Charts, scheduling pairs, and chasing players to submit times, and get their rounds played.
• same issues faced with card screenshots, and greenshots proving to the rest of the field that correct conditions were met, and clubs used.
• challenge of getting multiplayer games finished, with all the various glitches going on right now.
2. Running the event as single-player with Shoe's assistance in setting up tournament.
This could be done either just as a private tournament, accessed only via a link through the Forum Thread (as the TIO Monthly Events were from January through May), or publicly available through the full Tournament List in the Game Client/Tournament page (as was done for us by Shoe in June, and then for both events in August).
a) Private Link through Forum Only:
Pros:
• though it's a smaller group of players, anyone finding and using the link to play is more likely to be an honest participant!
Cons:
• … but with prizes on the line, would still need players to post proof of clubs used. So, in effect just reducing the field without avoiding the club proof problem.
b) Public through Game Client Tournament List
Pros:
• this vastly increases the participation, introducing 100s of players to this game format.
• people can play in their own time, no need for pairing up, or to navigate the disconnect challenges with multiplayer right now.
Cons:
• Players have to go to some trouble to learn about screenshots or short video proof in order to be eligible for prizes. However, players can choose to do this, or just enjoy playing the events for fun.
3. Do not require Club Proof, but only offer Prizes to those players that formally 'Claim' the prize in the forum thread, on the understanding that by 'claiming' they are making a public commitment to the community that they participated honestly. This is the method I used in the June event, when two of the players on the leaderboard opted not to claim, and one was exposed as having used wrong clubs. I don't like this option, because it seems likely to lead to witch-hunt behavior, and for those of us who genuinely want to know if our score is competitive, it leads to more questions than answers. Back in June, it also meant time spent monitoring certain players' Profile pages by a team of volunteers (not really how we want to spend our time here).
4. No Prizes at all
I've considered this option in response to player suggestions that if there were no prizes, we wouldn't have to worry about proof of clubs. However, I think there are two flaws with this: 1. if there were no prizes on the line, it defeats the goal of having strong players compete in a level-playing field event. Those of us who try and do well in this format are hoping to do so against the best players out there. So, no prizes would limit the participants and limit the submission of any stats either (which is a large part of what I find interesting about the events, to see how different players have tackled the course-management challenges each event poses)…
and 2. The best players still wouldn't know if they'd been beaten by someone playing honestly or not. For many top players, it's not about winning a sleeve or two, it's about the pride of winning the event. Offering prizes and asking for screenshots is our best way of establishing if the top scores are genuine.
--------------
So, it's sad that the Restricted-Club Programming doesn't work as it should, but until WGT put in the extra effort to complete the job they initiated when programming this feature in the first place, it seems to me that the best solution is to continue with the 2 b) option, keeping it as a public event through the tourney list and offering prizes as an incentive to see proof of honest participation.
Thanks for reading,
Corwyn