lichess.org
Donate

Pool 5+5

Hey Lichess users

There aren't many players in the pool 5+5. I would to ask if we can't try an other pool because I find it isn't very successful (it's my opinion it's maybe wrong)
Pools aren't very successful, it's nothing to do with the time control. They're going to need to be reworked.
5+0 is successful but the news versions probably don't help too.
You can always create an Arena tournament. They are like pools, but have a time limit to them and a final winner. You are pretty much guaranteed to get players in one of those.
Hi Clarkey

I wonder about reducing the transparancy of the pools (or at least as a new style?! ) - not to show the number of people in them ?! Or even the actual pool etc.

in fact, just buttons for "1-minute autopairing" "5-minute etc"

So you press these and wait - but have no clue whatsoever of the number of players in the pool etc.

I think this would create perhaps greater optimism and patience by reducing the level of transparency ?! And in doing that, more people would use it?!

If people currently see the pool and shows few players, it creates a bit too much realism and impatience perhaps ?!
Another point also is that the "non-transparency" pool style would mean far less embarassment when one of the higher rated loses, and loses a stack of rating points etc. Or whenever someone loses a stack of rating points etc - it is private to them.
That is a very novel idea, but it could be a blessing as well as a curse. For instance, a lot of players join pools with the knowledge that they'll be playing The Great Kingscrusher, or The Great Blitzstream. At the same time, they tend to leave as soon as the lichess superstars leave.

We also briefly considered in adding a lot of dummy accounts which would actually be low-level instances of Stockfish, but it would be downright unethical for people who want to play against human players.
The more transparent option has been the main consideration in the reimplementation. You simply press the button for the pool that you wish to enter on the lobby, a dialog appears indicating that a pairing is being searched for, and then the game begins.

Also, the pairing system will probably be re-done to match ICC a bit more, i.e. as the amount of time waiting increases, the breadth of allowable elo range increases. When a match is possible, you are immediately paired given you have not just played with each other.

Not sure when these changes will be implemented.

I think the problem at the moment is that pools are too out of the way from the conventional pairing method, and pools themselves have little benefit over the conventional method. Hence them going unused.

If we made them more accessible, and feel less separate, it might make them more popular.
I don't think 'transparency' will provide more players in the pools.

My psychology training inclines me to believe that the pools have been a failure because:

1) The rating system hurt their egos. Suddenly they were hundreds of points worse off than they previously thought.

2) Competition without a winner is less fun. Whether people "should" just concentrate on improving their game is immaterial - it is nice to have a winner.

3) The language, attitude and overall conduct of some players, especially in 1+0, was pretty poor. "Established" 1+0 players are notoriously ill-tempered and stressful, but newer or lower-ranked players will feel generally less equipped to deal with the emotional side of that.

I'm sure that my opinions count for nothing, but if you would like to make the pools popular, I suggest that you model them on the arena tournaments and use some form of carrot reward system for achievements. A separate ranking system would be good, too. Note the word "ranking" not "rating". People like comparison... and especially the ones you want to bring in - in other words the non-elite.

Good luck!

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.