You'd be very, very hard pressed to find a game site that didn't have players using multiple accounts. Barring requiring a credit card from each player (and even that can be fooled), it's just the nature of the beast, even though we try to avoid it.
But if you have a serious belief that someone is using multiple accounts, please drop us a note via the contact us saying what the accounts are and what, specifically, makes you think that they're the same person. We catch people doing this with our automated checks, but sometimes we catch it because someone tells us about a concern and, looking into it, we determine that it's really the case.
It's important to remember, though, just how little information you have to go on. Two players being online at similar times (or one right after the other), or typing similar messages, etc., is usually not because they're the same person.
But again, several times players have dropped us a note and we've been able to act on it, so by all means, if you have something significant to go on, please do bring it to our attention, and thanks in advance.
When I look at a player winning 85% plus on a game that involves chance I am going to assume they play with themselves. Its all ego mastribation to pump up a false sence of skill or talent in playing a game. Personally I am to old to play with myself and i do have the skills to play a good game.
i was on at the sametime and my name was in bold, theres wasn't, yet it showed up in bold in the top players list....
That means that between one page and the other, they either signed in or out. Or you were looking at different members of the four you're concerned about (they don't all have the same setting). The system isn't random about these things.
tracking an IP or hardware address from the computer would stop alot of it....
Gosh, why didn't I think of that? ;-)
Unlike some sites, Pocket-Monkey is family-friendly. That means that we don't prevent accounts using the same IP address. And IP addresses just raise the bar a tiny bit, they don't prevent a dedicated cheat. It's trivial to have a new IP every time you visit the site.
As I said privately, I cannot for obvious reasons go into how we track, identify, and deal with multiple account users. But we do do it. Imperfectly, for sure, but we do it as well as time (remember this is a spare-time thing) and technology (it's very easy to disguise yourself on the internet) allow. -- T.J. Crowder First Primate Pocket-Monkey.com
Again, remember just how little information you have to work with. How do you know it's not a bunch of friends (or a family) who said "Oh, hey, we haven't played on Pocket-Monkey for a while" and all went back and decided to start playing? Answer: You don't.
Could whatever four accounts you're talking about be one person? Sure. Are they necessarily one person? To a level of certainty required to justify taking action against them? Probably not. Is that dichotomy unfortunate? You betcha. :-)
At some point we'll add paid access to Pocket-Monkey (in addition to free access), and with paid accounts we'll be able to do more to check that people aren't running duplicate accounts. (It won't be foolproof, just a lot better.) -- T.J. Crowder First Primate Pocket-Monkey.com
Yes. Everyone has that option. It's on your profile: "Yes, include me in the Player Directory (and other player lists)" If you untick that box, we don't include your username in various lists on the site. There's absolutely nothing nefarious about it. Mostly people do that when they don't want to be hassled.
Nobody can be 100% with computer rolled dice. Their are people that cheat because they have no self confidence. Playing against yourself is just a losers attitude.
I'm sorry TJ but i will be finishing my current rounds and stopping again as a form of protest against this type of player...
If these same players are always logging in after 4-5 months of not playing, and they all enter the same tourny once that could be coincidence, but this has been happening for the last 3-5 years..... thats not coincidence...
I was brought up to believe 'if it's too good to be true, then generally it is'.....
It's too good to be true that this is always a conincidence....
Sore looser, no, as i have beaten them all (and some might say, whats the problem) before, but it's the principal, if i tried it i would get caught.....
Something has to be done otherwise it will continue and they will get away with it....
This is a great site, but players like that don't deserve to play honest people......
In addition to that I understand you have designed this site for the pleasure of gamers and i don't condemn that, i also applaud your technology prowess, your limited resources/costs and maybe i shouldn't be so quick to judge, but i believe 3-5 years is not a quick judgement.....
I'm sorry TJ but i will be finishing my current rounds and stopping again as a form of protest against this type of player...
Obviously it's your choice. I'd be sorry to see it happen.
This a bit tricky for me, because of my responsibility not to comment on individual accounts, which I take very seriously. I will just stress again that you do not know that the accounts you're referring to all belong to the same person. You're inferring it, based on very, very little evidence, and seem unwilling to entertain the notion that there's a non-nefarious explanation. I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt. And I have a lot more data to work with than you do. You might want to think about that. (None of which necessarily means you're wrong, of course.)
Anyway, wherever you play, enjoy your games! -- T.J. Crowder First Primate Pocket-Monkey.com
I have played many top ranked player in backgammon and reversi, and never doubted that there rise up the ranks, was done by so called cheating. Some player have just got the technique, i am still working on mine, lol after many years. good luck everyone, and may the best my win.
It depends on strength of the players and very much on the length of the match. 100% wins after a decent number of single-point backgammon matches would be unbelievable. 100% wins in 21-pointers is exceptional but certainly possible.
If you look at the Top Players page you'll see that the best percentages for 1-pointers are 87% and 75%. These are players who don't play in tournaments against players randomly chosen by Pocket Monkey but against friends who are clearly weaker than them, hence the very high winning rates. The majority of the high winning percentages are in the 65% region, which is about right for strong tournament players who get pitted against a random selection from the whole site.
That 60-70% ceiling is the result of the luck that the dice bring.
For 21-pointers it's very different. The advantage that a strong player has will occur in game after game. Luck is not usually able to overcome that advantage over the course of a long series. That strong player will lose some games but, over the entire match, they are more likely to win. If one player wins 2 games for every 1 that their opponent wins (ie. that 66% 1-pointer winning rate) .. who's going to win a 21-point match?
So, for player who is strong enough relative to their opponents, a 100% win rate is not only possible but almost to be expected, at least until the player fetches up against an opponent who can give them a matched-strength challenge and knocks that 100% down to 90-something.
Again, a player who plays against friends has a very good chance of a 90+ winning rate if they are much better than those friends, but it's also possible for tournament players who are sufficiently stronger than the site average.
posted by ironmanmv:
When I look at a player winning 85% plus on a game that involves chance I am going to assume they play with themselves.
The same applies to 85% except that 85% is very much more achievable in multi-point matches by players who have potential that they've realise through study and/or practice.
Your assumption may provide comfort to you but it's an unfair one that's not based on an understanding of how luck and the length of matches interact.
The same applies to 85% except that 85% is very much more achievable in multi-point matches by players who have potential that they've realise through study and/or practice.
Your assumption may provide comfort to you but it's an unfair one that's not based on an understanding of how luck and the length of matches interact. [/quote]
well lets add the elo rating you can win high numbers of games and still be less in the top 10 people because those people played more challenging players. for example if i am not wrong your rating in 21 point matches as you mentioned is high but the quality of those you won against must be alot lower since you are in 9th spot with only 1 person higher than you in % of wins. i would dare to say that those above you played more challenging players since their elo rating is lower than yours. I can only assume that you played those that were less talented than you. i would dare to say that i would find it more challenging playing: crazycazzy asdf Sesio Dundonian heartsvertigo some dream lcclick those are the ones with a higher elo rating with at least 6 to 16% less straight wins than you have. I could create an account to win an average of 50 to 60% wins play it and increase my elo rating along with my win% but i dont. i only play tournies and invites but when i see a high win ratio versus a low elo rating only proves the strong played the week
"i would dare to say that those above you played more challenging players since their elo rating is lower than yours." I should have said their elo ratings are higher than yours. while their win % is less and a lot less than yours.
Forum
software by
Crowder Software Pocket-Monkey and the Pocket-Monkey logo are trademarks of T.J. Crowder and Jock Murphy. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.
