Tuesday, October 03, 2023

Proposal: Compounding Problems

Timed out Unpopular, 2-2. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 05 Oct 2023 22:51:15 UTC

If the proposal “Acca cadabra” was not enacted, this proposal has no effect.

In the subrule “Accusations”, after the text “tampering with a sporting fixture” add the following text:

, or if the Sporting Event was part of an Acca placed by the Accused Punter they are fined 20 * N * N instead where N is the number of Bets in that Acca

I’m proposing an exponential fine for being correctly accused of Meddling in a Sporting Event where the Accused has placed an Acca, because the winnings have a multiplying effect on the subsequent winnings and thus the Meddling should be punished at an exponential rate relative to the size of the Acca. This keeps the Acca risk appropriately high for the high reward even with Meddling.

posted by JonathanDark at 03 Oct 2023 12:51:00 UTC Comments (9)

Comments

Clucky: he/him

03-10-2023 18:00:37 UTC

against doesn’t really fix the core of the problem

JonathanDark: he/him

03-10-2023 22:02:01 UTC

How so? The fine scales exponentially with the number of Bets in the Acca. Is the fine still not sufficiently large, or is there another problem that I’m missing?

JonathanDark: he/him

03-10-2023 22:21:43 UTC

Well ok, the fine itself doesn’t scale exponentially, but the multiplier of the fine does. I figured that scaling the 20 Readies by a power of N was too far.

Clucky: he/him

03-10-2023 22:28:15 UTC

the score of the problem is that meddling on different bets on the acca have massively different consequences if you get caught or not

JonathanDark: he/him

03-10-2023 22:42:39 UTC

You voted for the Acca, so are you just seeking the perfect solution for Meddling penalties, or would you rather not have any penalties at all?

I think it would be good for all Punters to understand the risks of Meddling in an Acca so that they balance their risk-reward tolerance appropriately, well before the end.

JonathanDark: he/him

03-10-2023 22:45:17 UTC

I also fear that what you’re suggesting would wind up being an unnecessarily complicated formula. I’m happy to be proven wrong, but I personally don’t care to expend the effort on it. The formula I proposed isn’t perfect, but it’s “good enough” in my eyes. I would definitely support a better one if you have it and it’s not too burdensome to figure out or calculate.

Kevan: he/him

04-10-2023 07:36:30 UTC

for

Josh: he/they

04-10-2023 08:53:19 UTC

for

Bucky:

05-10-2023 03:17:59 UTC

against , again on grounds of an unsound formula. It should simply fine equal to the largest winnings of any bet in the Acca.