• Si us plau, copia i enganxa el missatge d'error que veus a la pantalla, si és que n'hi ha algun.

The existing ELO calculation after a win (or loss) treats the result as a win (loss) against each of the opponents, **and a tie with the player's partner**. That means that if you are paired with a weak player, ot only is winning more challenging (which is fine, luck of the draw) but also your ELO is docked because of partner's weakness.
As an extreme example, say a 600 is paired with a 20 ELO, playing against a couple of 310 ELO opponents, and everybody has K=20. If the 600/20 team wins, the 600 gains about 4 points against each opponent, and ties his partner, which is about (-18+2)/2 = -9 ELO points. The sum is -1, so the expert player, having beaten a couple of strong players despite being paired with a beginner, would *lose* about half an ELO point. Since the odds of winning, based on linear approximation using the combined ELO's, were about 50%, that expert (and his partner) should have gained 10 points.
The best solution is to treat the game as a two-player game, using the pair-averaged ELO rating for each pair to determine the effective ELO. If that is awkward within the overall BGA framework, then at least the system should not be indicating a tie against your partner.

• Si us plau, què volies fer, què vas fer i que va succeir

• Quin és el meu navegador?

• Si us plau, copieu/enganxeu el text mostrat en anglès en comptes del teu idioma. Si tens una captura de pantalla d'aquest error (bona pràctica), pots utilitzar Imgur.com per pujar-ho i copiar i enganxar el link aquí.

The existing ELO calculation after a win (or loss) treats the result as a win (loss) against each of the opponents, **and a tie with the player's partner**. That means that if you are paired with a weak player, ot only is winning more challenging (which is fine, luck of the draw) but also your ELO is docked because of partner's weakness.
As an extreme example, say a 600 is paired with a 20 ELO, playing against a couple of 310 ELO opponents, and everybody has K=20. If the 600/20 team wins, the 600 gains about 4 points against each opponent, and ties his partner, which is about (-18+2)/2 = -9 ELO points. The sum is -1, so the expert player, having beaten a couple of strong players despite being paired with a beginner, would *lose* about half an ELO point. Since the odds of winning, based on linear approximation using the combined ELO's, were about 50%, that expert (and his partner) should have gained 10 points.
The best solution is to treat the game as a two-player game, using the pair-averaged ELO rating for each pair to determine the effective ELO. If that is awkward within the overall BGA framework, then at least the system should not be indicating a tie against your partner.

• És aquest text disponible al sistema de traducció? Si és així, ha sigut traduït fa més de 24 hores?

• Quin és el meu navegador?

• Si us plau, expliqueu el vostre suggeriment de manera precisa i concisa, per que sigui el més fàcil d'entendre possible.

The existing ELO calculation after a win (or loss) treats the result as a win (loss) against each of the opponents, **and a tie with the player's partner**. That means that if you are paired with a weak player, ot only is winning more challenging (which is fine, luck of the draw) but also your ELO is docked because of partner's weakness.
As an extreme example, say a 600 is paired with a 20 ELO, playing against a couple of 310 ELO opponents, and everybody has K=20. If the 600/20 team wins, the 600 gains about 4 points against each opponent, and ties his partner, which is about (-18+2)/2 = -9 ELO points. The sum is -1, so the expert player, having beaten a couple of strong players despite being paired with a beginner, would *lose* about half an ELO point. Since the odds of winning, based on linear approximation using the combined ELO's, were about 50%, that expert (and his partner) should have gained 10 points.
The best solution is to treat the game as a two-player game, using the pair-averaged ELO rating for each pair to determine the effective ELO. If that is awkward within the overall BGA framework, then at least the system should not be indicating a tie against your partner.

• Quin és el meu navegador?

• Què es mostrava a la pantalla quan estaves bloquejat (pantalla en blanc? Part de la interfície del joc? Missatge d'error?)

The existing ELO calculation after a win (or loss) treats the result as a win (loss) against each of the opponents, **and a tie with the player's partner**. That means that if you are paired with a weak player, ot only is winning more challenging (which is fine, luck of the draw) but also your ELO is docked because of partner's weakness.
As an extreme example, say a 600 is paired with a 20 ELO, playing against a couple of 310 ELO opponents, and everybody has K=20. If the 600/20 team wins, the 600 gains about 4 points against each opponent, and ties his partner, which is about (-18+2)/2 = -9 ELO points. The sum is -1, so the expert player, having beaten a couple of strong players despite being paired with a beginner, would *lose* about half an ELO point. Since the odds of winning, based on linear approximation using the combined ELO's, were about 50%, that expert (and his partner) should have gained 10 points.
The best solution is to treat the game as a two-player game, using the pair-averaged ELO rating for each pair to determine the effective ELO. If that is awkward within the overall BGA framework, then at least the system should not be indicating a tie against your partner.

• Quin és el meu navegador?

• Quina part de les regles no s'han respectat per l'adaptació de BGA

The existing ELO calculation after a win (or loss) treats the result as a win (loss) against each of the opponents, **and a tie with the player's partner**. That means that if you are paired with a weak player, ot only is winning more challenging (which is fine, luck of the draw) but also your ELO is docked because of partner's weakness.
As an extreme example, say a 600 is paired with a 20 ELO, playing against a couple of 310 ELO opponents, and everybody has K=20. If the 600/20 team wins, the 600 gains about 4 points against each opponent, and ties his partner, which is about (-18+2)/2 = -9 ELO points. The sum is -1, so the expert player, having beaten a couple of strong players despite being paired with a beginner, would *lose* about half an ELO point. Since the odds of winning, based on linear approximation using the combined ELO's, were about 50%, that expert (and his partner) should have gained 10 points.
The best solution is to treat the game as a two-player game, using the pair-averaged ELO rating for each pair to determine the effective ELO. If that is awkward within the overall BGA framework, then at least the system should not be indicating a tie against your partner.

• És visible la violació de les normes durant la repetició de la partida? Si es així, en quin número de moviment?

• Quin és el meu navegador?

• Quina va ser l'acció del joc que volies fer?

The existing ELO calculation after a win (or loss) treats the result as a win (loss) against each of the opponents, **and a tie with the player's partner**. That means that if you are paired with a weak player, ot only is winning more challenging (which is fine, luck of the draw) but also your ELO is docked because of partner's weakness.
As an extreme example, say a 600 is paired with a 20 ELO, playing against a couple of 310 ELO opponents, and everybody has K=20. If the 600/20 team wins, the 600 gains about 4 points against each opponent, and ties his partner, which is about (-18+2)/2 = -9 ELO points. The sum is -1, so the expert player, having beaten a couple of strong players despite being paired with a beginner, would *lose* about half an ELO point. Since the odds of winning, based on linear approximation using the combined ELO's, were about 50%, that expert (and his partner) should have gained 10 points.
The best solution is to treat the game as a two-player game, using the pair-averaged ELO rating for each pair to determine the effective ELO. If that is awkward within the overall BGA framework, then at least the system should not be indicating a tie against your partner.

• Què intentes fer per dur a terme aquesta acció del joc?

• Què va passar quan ho vas intentar fer (missatge d'error, missatge de la barra d'estat de la partida, ...)?

• Quin és el meu navegador?

• A quina fase del joc va passar l'error (quina era la ordre en curs)?

The existing ELO calculation after a win (or loss) treats the result as a win (loss) against each of the opponents, **and a tie with the player's partner**. That means that if you are paired with a weak player, ot only is winning more challenging (which is fine, luck of the draw) but also your ELO is docked because of partner's weakness.
As an extreme example, say a 600 is paired with a 20 ELO, playing against a couple of 310 ELO opponents, and everybody has K=20. If the 600/20 team wins, the 600 gains about 4 points against each opponent, and ties his partner, which is about (-18+2)/2 = -9 ELO points. The sum is -1, so the expert player, having beaten a couple of strong players despite being paired with a beginner, would *lose* about half an ELO point. Since the odds of winning, based on linear approximation using the combined ELO's, were about 50%, that expert (and his partner) should have gained 10 points.
The best solution is to treat the game as a two-player game, using the pair-averaged ELO rating for each pair to determine the effective ELO. If that is awkward within the overall BGA framework, then at least the system should not be indicating a tie against your partner.

• Què va passar quan vas intentar dur a terme l'acció del joc (missatge d'error, missatge de la barra d'estat del joc, ...)?

• Quin és el meu navegador?

• Si us plau, descriviu el problema de visualització. Si tens una captura de pantalla d'aquest error (bona pràctica), pots utilitzar Imgur.com per pujar-ho i copiar i enganxar el link aquí.

The existing ELO calculation after a win (or loss) treats the result as a win (loss) against each of the opponents, **and a tie with the player's partner**. That means that if you are paired with a weak player, ot only is winning more challenging (which is fine, luck of the draw) but also your ELO is docked because of partner's weakness.
As an extreme example, say a 600 is paired with a 20 ELO, playing against a couple of 310 ELO opponents, and everybody has K=20. If the 600/20 team wins, the 600 gains about 4 points against each opponent, and ties his partner, which is about (-18+2)/2 = -9 ELO points. The sum is -1, so the expert player, having beaten a couple of strong players despite being paired with a beginner, would *lose* about half an ELO point. Since the odds of winning, based on linear approximation using the combined ELO's, were about 50%, that expert (and his partner) should have gained 10 points.
The best solution is to treat the game as a two-player game, using the pair-averaged ELO rating for each pair to determine the effective ELO. If that is awkward within the overall BGA framework, then at least the system should not be indicating a tie against your partner.

• Quin és el meu navegador?

• Si us plau, copieu/enganxeu el text mostrat en anglès en comptes del teu idioma. Si tens una captura de pantalla d'aquest error (bona pràctica), pots utilitzar Imgur.com per pujar-ho i copiar i enganxar el link aquí.

The existing ELO calculation after a win (or loss) treats the result as a win (loss) against each of the opponents, **and a tie with the player's partner**. That means that if you are paired with a weak player, ot only is winning more challenging (which is fine, luck of the draw) but also your ELO is docked because of partner's weakness.
As an extreme example, say a 600 is paired with a 20 ELO, playing against a couple of 310 ELO opponents, and everybody has K=20. If the 600/20 team wins, the 600 gains about 4 points against each opponent, and ties his partner, which is about (-18+2)/2 = -9 ELO points. The sum is -1, so the expert player, having beaten a couple of strong players despite being paired with a beginner, would *lose* about half an ELO point. Since the odds of winning, based on linear approximation using the combined ELO's, were about 50%, that expert (and his partner) should have gained 10 points.
The best solution is to treat the game as a two-player game, using the pair-averaged ELO rating for each pair to determine the effective ELO. If that is awkward within the overall BGA framework, then at least the system should not be indicating a tie against your partner.

• És aquest text disponible al sistema de traducció? Si és així, ha sigut traduït fa més de 24 hores?

• Quin és el meu navegador?

• Si us plau, expliqueu el vostre suggeriment de manera precisa i concisa, per que sigui el més fàcil d'entendre possible.

The existing ELO calculation after a win (or loss) treats the result as a win (loss) against each of the opponents, **and a tie with the player's partner**. That means that if you are paired with a weak player, ot only is winning more challenging (which is fine, luck of the draw) but also your ELO is docked because of partner's weakness.
As an extreme example, say a 600 is paired with a 20 ELO, playing against a couple of 310 ELO opponents, and everybody has K=20. If the 600/20 team wins, the 600 gains about 4 points against each opponent, and ties his partner, which is about (-18+2)/2 = -9 ELO points. The sum is -1, so the expert player, having beaten a couple of strong players despite being paired with a beginner, would *lose* about half an ELO point. Since the odds of winning, based on linear approximation using the combined ELO's, were about 50%, that expert (and his partner) should have gained 10 points.
The best solution is to treat the game as a two-player game, using the pair-averaged ELO rating for each pair to determine the effective ELO. If that is awkward within the overall BGA framework, then at least the system should not be indicating a tie against your partner.

• Quin és el meu navegador?