• 如果有的话，请将你在屏幕上所看到的错误信息粘贴出来.

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.

• 请说明你当时想做什么，你做了什么，然后发生了什么

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 请以英文复制／粘贴显示文字而非你的语言。 如果你有这个系统漏洞发生时的屏幕截图(画质不要太差)，你可以使用Imgur.com来把它上传到网络，然后将链接复制/粘贴到这里来。

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.

• 这段文本在翻译系统中吗？如果存在，它被翻译是否已超过二十四小时？

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 请简明而精确地解释您的建议，以便让人明白您想表达的意思。

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.

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 当你被封锁的时候，屏幕上出现了些什么呢？(空白的屏幕？部分游戏平台画面？错误的信息？)

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.

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 哪个规则没有被BGA的设计小组写进游戏里？

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.

• 在游戏回放中，是否有不符合游戏规则的地方？如果有的话，请问是在哪一步呢？

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 你当时是想做哪个游戏行动？

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.

• 你在想做什么的时候，触发了这个游戏选项？

• 当你想这么做时，发生了什么事(错误信息，游戏状态信息，......)？

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 请问这个问题发生在游戏的哪个阶段(当前的游戏说明是什么)？

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.

• 当你想进行一个游戏行动时，发生了什么事(错误信息，游戏状态信息，......)？

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 请描述一下显示画面上面的问题。 如果你有这个系统漏洞发生时的屏幕截图(画质不要太差)，你可以使用Imgur.com来把它上传到网络，然后将链接复制/粘贴到这里来。

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.

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 请以英文复制／粘贴显示文字而非你的语言。 如果你有这个系统漏洞发生时的屏幕截图(画质不要太差)，你可以使用Imgur.com来把它上传到网络，然后将链接复制/粘贴到这里来。

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.

• 这段文本在翻译系统中吗？如果存在，它被翻译是否已超过二十四小时？

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 请简明而精确地解释您的建议，以便让人明白您想表达的意思。

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.

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？