Forums

Help › Forums

High ding rate = cheating?

Sat, Dec 31 2016 5:26 PM (437 replies)
  • Duckster789
    534 Posts
    Fri, Jul 22 2016 8:53 PM

    Jeff, don't get frustrated. They will twist your words and try to belittle you. They know the rules of radicals.

     

     

     

     

    Saul Alinsky’s 12 Rules for Radicals

    Here is the complete list from Alinsky.

    * RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood. (These are two things of which there is a plentiful supply. Government and corporations always have a difficult time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with economic arguments.)

    * RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone. (Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don’t address the “real” issues. This is why. They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.)

    * RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)

    * RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)

    * RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)

    * RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no different that any other human being. We all avoid “un-fun” activities, and but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)

    * RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)

    * RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)

    * RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. (Perception is reality. Large organizations always prepare a worst-case scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists’ minds. The upshot is that the organization will expend enormous time and energy, creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclusions. The possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)

    * RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Unions used this tactic. Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th Century incurred management’s wrath, often in the form of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.)

    * RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem. (Old saw: If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. Activist organizations have an agenda, and their strategy is to hold a place at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power. So, they have to have a compromise solution.)

    * RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

     

  • mkg335
    5,491 Posts
    Fri, Jul 22 2016 8:55 PM

    May I suggest we try not to let rancor rule the day here.  Points worth considering are being made on both sides of the argument.

    I don't think wgt are out to get anyone, I think they're responding to pleas from the community to clean up the game.  I don't know the nature of nor the amount of data to which they have access.

    My only concern is this particular case.  I believe that in their effort to roust out the cheaters, wgt jumped to conclusions based on a false positive, an outlier*.

    My main objection to this particular situation is the presumption of guilt, the idea that the player is presumed guilty and required to prove his innocence.  This is what sticks in my craw and rubs me the wrongest of ways.

    *An outlier may be due to variability in the measurement or it may indicate experimental error; the latter are sometimes excluded from the data set.

  • ct690911
    7,205 Posts
    Fri, Jul 22 2016 8:55 PM

    23 pages and counting. The member who had his account closed is probably already playing under another account//name. I would suggest this is the case whether he is guilty or wrongly accused.

    I would also suspect that he won't be a common presence in the forum re: posting score cards and drawing unnecessary attention to himself.

    ct

  • Duckster789
    534 Posts
    Fri, Jul 22 2016 9:03 PM

    mkg335:

    May I suggest we try not to let rancor rule the day here.  Points worth considering are being made on both sides of the argument.

    I don't think wgt are out to get anyone, I think they're responding to pleas from the community to clean up the game.  I don't know the nature of nor the amount of data to which they have access.

    My only concern is this particular case.  I believe that in their effort to roust out the cheaters, wgt jumped to conclusions based on a false positive, an outlier*.

    My main objection to this particular situation is the presumption of guilt, the idea that the player is presumed guilty and required to prove his innocence.  This is what sticks in my craw and rubs me the wrongest of ways.

    *An outlier may be due to variability in the measurement or it may indicate experimental error; the latter are sometimes excluded from the data set.

    In other words, you are continuing to beat a dead horse in hopes it will come alive.

  • AgentBrown123
    907 Posts
    Fri, Jul 22 2016 9:20 PM

    fatdan:

    What that basically says is, they have a new program that can tell them what a players ding% is, and that is really all it does...makes you a possible target, AND that could be any of you!

    But what if the program they used showed just how many dings one achieves seperately from drives to approach shots? Say he had maybe 95% dinged shots on approach shots yet only 40% on drives in an attempt to bring down his insane ding% to a more believable 79%? There is a ton of possible grey area as to how they came about final decision.

    If this indeed was the case it would be absolutely insane to disclose. You would help "cheats" understand  how to manipulate their numbers to avoid wgts cheatdar ;D. On that note, maybe I should delete this post...

    Btw, I completely understand why you all are defending him, I really do. I would do the exact same if it were my friend.

    fatdan:

    I have seen many posts over the years here and on the other site accusing AB123 of being a cheat...all I know is he is a very good player, won some Major tournaments and has been around a long time regardless of what is said...if I was dim witted and believed everything I heard, my opinion of him would be different now wouldn't it...

    So if one of these self appointed "cheat busters" decide to drop a PM accusing you, I hope your an "off ding" player LMAO

    Lmao!! Good point but trust me, anyone who has played with me knows my putting saves my you know what :)). I have nothing to be worried about....lol

    For example you'll rarely see me compete in any closest to pin contests...

  • jeffmatulich
    482 Posts
    Fri, Jul 22 2016 9:22 PM

    mkg335:
    My main objection to this particular situation is the presumption of guilt, the idea that the player is presumed guilty and required to prove his innocence.  This is what sticks in my craw and rubs me the wrongest of ways.

     

    Mr. mkg335 (again, awesome guitar dude If that really is the basis behind your handle)

     

    Way to bring it down....I have a soft spot for this issue too (unbelievably), however based on the info it seems pretty dire.  I would welcome the notion of bringing this player back, giving him 2 weeks to recalibrate his game and then put him back on the clock for another 30 day cycle.....Then see what happens....Would be a cool wgt experiment if he and wgt were willing.    WGT to announce their test criteria, said player to post all his rounds....

    Im a fair dude - would love to see the results.  Don't think it will happen though for so many reasons and on so many levels. ;)

    cheers,

     

  • mkg335
    5,491 Posts
    Fri, Jul 22 2016 10:41 PM

    Jeff, meant to mention it earlier when you first guessed what the 335 meant, you're absolutely correct.  A cherry red es335 was my main ax for a long time but have since traded it and am using the three major food groups, Tele, Strat and LP.  The LP is the studio model, nice desert burst finish with gold hardware...pure joy to play.

    I like your idea of a wgt experiment, pretty much the same thing I've been hoping for, but I agree it's a long shot at best.  I'm also aware that loyalty can sometimes blind us and blur objectivity.  I truly wish there were a way to resolve this matter to everyone's satisfaction.

    Here's a pic I found that's pretty close to what mine looks like, except I top wrap my strings:

  • DodgyPutter
    4,690 Posts
    Sat, Jul 23 2016 2:09 AM

    I'll try for a third time.

    coors71:
    Ok, the 40% and 79% are both from WGT. No the are going to disclose their information on these two numbers. Yes we are left to speculate where and how they came up with these numbers. We do not know if that 79% is right or not. All we have is what WGT has sent to him. 

    What you, or someone who watched (even better still has access to) the "trial" could probably tell us is what wgt are counting, although everyone keeps saying they don't know. For instance are they counting putts?

    You know they counted that round at 40% (giving dings when the screen froze).  He had nine from the tee, maybe somewhere around eight from the f/way and eleven putts.  How many of each did he ding?

  • WigerToods2010
    8,447 Posts
    Sat, Jul 23 2016 4:28 AM

    How are we all today?

    Just a wee summary for any new readers:

    The player was hitting 'em stiff from day 1. The player eventually struggled to get MP games within the community.

    The continual high scoring was what brought his account to wgt's attention, albeit with a little help from a few emails to CS.

    His account was then monitored for a 30 day period.

    Over the month/30 days an average 'ding rate' of 79% was recorded by wgt.

    e.g. 100 rounds @ 100% + 100 rounds @ 58% - forget what was or wasn't scored it's totally irrelevant.

    If (too funny!)  the 100% mark was never achieved  then the lower % number would significantly increase... 200* rounds ffs. Not 2, or 10, or 20... 200!

    Wgt then recorded a 40% 'ding rate' in a single monitored round -  a figure not even close to any other single round in the aforementioned 30 day period. Whatever any other player's 'ding rate' is means not a thing in relation to the banned player.

    Anyone can rip apart the above at their leisure. Won't change my own view that wgt are indeed 100% correct with their decision at this point in time.

    Btw the original thread title of  High Ding Rate = Cheating? I'd say no, not necessarily.

    *Figure taken from the banned player's own account over a random 30 day period.

  • russellfahey
    4,286 Posts
    Sat, Jul 23 2016 4:36 AM

    I have been following this thread,out of curiosity more than anything else.I do have a couple of questions though :-

    1) Did anyone watch this trial round? And if so did anyone count the dings?

    2) Did this % include putts aswell? As some players like to use the off ding method of putting.

    So maybe if someone could perhaps put the link up for this round,assuming it was streamed and posted on social media.

    I also find the lack of input from the mods a bit disconcerting,as i saw Shoe and Icon also had an opinion on the trial round.Maybe if they could  come into this thread and say something,it may well sate some of the players who have commented on this thread.But like AB said i'm not expecting a warts and all detailed account,as this would play into the cheaters hands.

     

    Russell

RSS