sandbaggers

Usually it means that someone competes that has more skill than the class of competitors when competitors are grouped by skill level. I'm not sure if you can sandbag in photography but you can in many firearm sports, golf, ect.
 
Usually it means that someone competes that has more skill than the class of competitors when competitors are grouped by skill level. I'm not sure if you can sandbag in photography but you can in many firearm sports, golf, ect.
Usually it means something like this, but in the case of the challenges the expression is (mis)used to refer to giving other entrants a low mark (typically half a star) to reduce their score and hence increase your own chance of wining. It is not uncommon for the winners (and other highly placed entrants) to have several half stars when the rest of their scores have a very high average.
 
Thank you for explaining that in the context of DPR.
 
In short, sandbag is sabotaging other's good photo in order to advance their own submission.

In DPR challenges, the "best photo" often get SANDBAGGED into #2, #3, or even lower. The winner is usually the photo with the least Sandbagging attack. So #1 photo isn't necessarily the best. That is why I consider any photos placing in the Top 10 are ALL WINNERS.

Perhaps DPR should just implement a Top 10 system rather than a numerical scoring to prevent Sandbagging.
 
Last edited:
So?

The opposite could just as well be true: all of those 1/2 star ratings could be authentic, and the many 4-5 star ratings could simply be spurious votes.
 
So?

The opposite could just as well be true: all of those 1/2 star ratings could be authentic, and the many 4-5 star ratings could simply be spurious votes.
From a combination of observing the distributions of ratings, my own judgment of the photos, and what the challenge host says (about eg one voter giving all but one of the photos a half star), I am pretty confident that these half stars are people trying to reduce the chances of photos they think will score well.
 
So?

The opposite could just as well be true: all of those 1/2 star ratings could be authentic, and the many 4-5 star ratings could simply be spurious votes.
From a combination of observing the distributions of ratings, my own judgment of the photos, and what the challenge host says (about eg one voter giving all but one of the photos a half star), I am pretty confident that these half stars are people trying to reduce the chances of photos they think will score well.
Interesting.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top