lichess.org
Donate

Can players get a marathon trophy if they got their prize place after some were disqualified?

What if player's account is closed. In a lot of tournaments there are people with closed accounts on top. If we don't count them, players with open, not cheat accounts should move up. Maybe not move up in the table, but get a different trophy. In my case in Winter 2020 I got 53rd place, but there like 15 accounts above me that are either closed (Winner closed too) or straight up marked like @TugaGang and @Chess18-25 and @jpablito_7. So I should get top-50 trophy, not top-100. Even if we don't count closed, but only remove marked. (Even though people sometimes close to not get banned for cheating or after they got banned)

Not even saying that if user was shadowbanned I can't figure out if he was or not

What if player's account is closed. In a lot of tournaments there are people with closed accounts on top. If we don't count them, players with open, not cheat accounts should move up. Maybe not move up in the table, but get a different trophy. In my case in [Winter 2020 I got 53rd place](https://lichess.org/tournament/winter20?player=CyberShredder), but there like 15 accounts above me that are either closed (Winner closed too) or straight up marked like @TugaGang and @Chess18-25 and @jpablito_7. So I should get top-50 trophy, not top-100. Even if we don't count closed, but only remove marked. (Even though people sometimes close to not get banned for cheating or after they got banned) Not even saying that if user was shadowbanned I can't figure out if he was or not

@CyberShredder said ^

In a lot of tournaments there are people with closed accounts on top.

True! I was thinking about cases where the removal from the tournament might not be due to cheating, but then it shouldn't change anything important. So, I hope that this will be resolved.

Thank you for pointing that out, @CyberShredder

@CyberShredder said [^](/forum/redirect/post/QujEeW6k) > In a lot of tournaments there are people with closed accounts on top. True! I was thinking about cases where the removal from the tournament might not be due to cheating, but then it shouldn't change anything important. So, I hope that this will be resolved. Thank you for pointing that out, @CyberShredder

@CyberShredder said ^

What if player's account is closed. In a lot of tournaments there are people with closed accounts on top. If we don't count them, players with open, not cheat accounts should move up. Maybe not move up in the table, but get a different trophy. In my case in Winter 2020 I got 53rd place, but there like 15 accounts above me that are eit...

I totally agree.

@CyberShredder said [^](/forum/redirect/post/QujEeW6k) > What if player's account is closed. In a lot of tournaments there are people with closed accounts on top. If we don't count them, players with open, not cheat accounts should move up. Maybe not move up in the table, but get a different trophy. In my case in [Winter 2020 I got 53rd place](https://lichess.org/tournament/winter20?player=CyberShredder), but there like 15 accounts above me that are eit... I totally agree.
<Comment deleted by user>

If that helps, here is how I aproximately imagine the solution

For example:
a Rankings of a tournament are provisional for some minimal specified time (so people have some time to make a report after the tournament ends) + additional unspecified time (in case there's too many reports)
b During this time, reports that mention games from the tournament of interest are handled. In case some were restricted for fair play, they have some specified time to appeal
c After there are no more reports and possible appeals for a specific tournament (mentioning games from it), it's rankings shift according to fair play restrictions and the results are made final
d In case some accounts were closed for other reasons, their results stay under an anonymous name, so they didn't confuse other participants with their absence.

Please tell why you like dislike this and offer changes, they would be greatly appreciated!

If that helps, here is how I aproximately imagine the solution For example: a Rankings of a tournament are provisional for some minimal specified time (so people have some time to make a report after the tournament ends) + additional unspecified time (in case there's too many reports) b During this time, reports that mention games from the tournament of interest are handled. In case some were restricted for fair play, they have some specified time to appeal c After there are no more reports and possible appeals for a specific tournament (mentioning games from it), it's rankings shift according to fair play restrictions and the results are made final d In case some accounts were closed for other reasons, their results stay under an anonymous name, so they didn't confuse other participants with their absence. Please tell why you like dislike this and offer changes, they would be greatly appreciated!

Also, can I ask you guys for your opinion please?
Thank you

Would you mind if you had to wait for some time a couple days after a marathon ends before the trophies are given out? So that the rankings were made more fair during that time

If you don't mind react, to this message with a like
If you do mind, react to this message with a dislike

Thank you once again

Also, can I ask you guys for your opinion please? Thank you Would you mind if you had to wait for some time a couple days after a marathon ends before the trophies are given out? So that the rankings were made more fair during that time If you don't mind react, to this message with a like If you do mind, react to this message with a dislike Thank you once again