I often receive this question, and thought that with the start of the new Global Challenge that it would be a a good time to discuss this.

The question, in some such form, is:

"How on earth do people answer 15 questions in 20-30 seconds? They've GOT to be cheating!"

We see fast times like these most frequently in the easy game, some smartest game categories, and the early divisions of the global challenge. Occasionally you see fast times in other games, although it tends to be rarer. It is no secret that a small number of FunTrivia players are incredibly fast.

It's a good question, because those times do look fast, and perhaps even suspicious, don't they? That's an average of less than 2 seconds or so per question. Clearly it's difficult to imagine reading all of the text of each question, reading each answer, thinking, clicking, and then scrolling to the next question in 2 seconds.

It is all, however, occurring completely legitimately. For starters, every single FunTrivia tournament (daily/hourly/GC game) has built in cheat protection. Very rarely will you actually receive identical questions to someone else. Yes, there is often overlap and the difficulty levels are the same to keep a fair playing field, but our algorithms are pretty effective at stopping intentional cheating. We also have other methods for detecting cheaters, multiple-computer users, multiple-account players, etc.

The secret of scoring fast is twofold: small question pools, and repetition.

A lot of our "very easy" question pools are fairly thin. There aren't a ton of questions in these pools because there are only so many "very easy" questions that one can ask about "religion", for example. Our difficult categories tend to have many times more questions.

Next comes repetition. FunTrivia has been running for over 10 years, and it's not a stretch to say that a good number of our active players playing today have been here for 5+ years. Many of our top players have been playing 8 years or more. Almost every day. Multiple times a day. Multiple games per session. We're talking about millions of trivia questions viewed per player.

Some of our top players have literally seen each of our "very easy" questions hundreds or in some cases likely closer to a thousand times.

Add these two together, and our faster players don't even need to really read the easier questions. They just know the answer by identifying a keyword or two in the question or answer. The amazing thing is that some players can do this even in some of the larger question pools, where there are thousands of questions. I'm sure some likely have photographic memory too, allowing them to memorize some of our deeper question pools.

As for scrolling tactics, some players use their keyboards (tab, etc), others use their middle mouse button to scroll. Some people hit page down.

It's precisely because of the group of super-fast players that we added the "division" system within most hourly and daily games a while ago, to give newer players a chance to challenge themselves against players of similar experience level on the site. I actually added this after playing some games myself and getting irritated at the fast scores! As a newbie player myself, I wanted a fairer comparison of my scores. The division/level system allows fast players to put their legitimately earned skills to test, while also allowing us mere mortals to play against one another by reading and thinking.

As such, don't be disappointed when you see other players score insanely quickly. Perhaps if you play a few thousand games you too could one day have a chance against them! Even then, maybe not. Some of us just are never going to be fast. I constructed a set of games specifically for such people (monster quiz, 195 day bus ride, scavenger hunts, treasure hunt, mind melt casual mode, etc). FunTrivia really does have something for everyone.

If you're the type that likes to compare yourself to other players, save yourself some heartache and compare yourself to those in your experience/level range where the comparisons at least are somewhat fair.

Happy trivia!
Terry

When I first joined FT, it took me 51, or more, seconds to complete one game in Globals.

Practice helped me reduce the time.

Thanks for everything!

Practice, practice, practice.

Well said Terry. I've been here over nine years myself.

hi all
my results refer only to the latest global challenge test results that i can find on the screen.
there are 3 scores. 3 of 3 were 13 in an average time of 71 seconds.
in my teens i was a speed reader but after numerous strokes, heart attacks and general old age (now 78+) this is the best i seem to be able to do.
the best game i did was the first global challenge were i was 10th but that game (in a surprise to me) only counted the top players. so in the first game when i was younger i should in my opinion gotten an immortal badge but did not. i still wonder how come?
but at least i can still play and still run my team. one of the best (classicalmusic/mensan).
so thanks for the memories.

I haven't figured out how to speed up my brain yet, but using the Control Settings certainly speeds up your mouse.

I know just what you mean cowdunking.

I've been playing (and reading) for a little over four years and although I can have flashes of brilliance, for some reason it can depend a lot upon what time of the day I play - like early in My morning around 2 or 3am!

I am on the hunt to break my 20 second mark.

But it Is fun to battle friends.

And I was upset that it now resets at 11:00 my time. Suddenly I don't feel so bad. I'll have to come up with another excuse for 'slow brain syndrome'. CD

20 seconds? Even with a mouse on steroids I can't click them that fast, never mind any kind of speed reading. I'm not complaining and I'm not jealous. Just in awe.

One case I can't see an explanation for (other than system error) was a 15/15 in 4 seconds for a Religion category in a GC round a year or two ago. I assume Divine Intervention might have been involved.

Happy Speed Demon Trivia!

Perhaps time travel has finally been invented. I know I would need to start in the future and score in the past to manage 40 seconds much less 4. Tried playing once with my son's mouse, which is set super fast for gaming, but couldn't seem to keep it on the screen. I guess it's just a matter of how your brain functions, and mine is getting slow.

Even clicking at random I can not beat some of the fastest times I sometimes see

I hope this is close to the right Topic folks?

A query?

Recenly a Tournament Hostess banned a member for Googling. I feel so strongly about this unfairness that I just had to post about it.
On a particular Tournament one Day everybody got 9/10 right in their usual times, except for one member who got 10 in about 160 seconds or something and he/she got banned for that??? because the Hostess deemed Googling as Cheating???
I'm sorry but I think that Hostess has it all wrong and is trying to make Her own rules to suit her own Tournaments.
I think that is absolutely ridiculous. Of course people can Google, it's all about learning isn't it? and the Tournaments are about time and memory mostly and if somebody wants to Google, why not?
They're wasting loads of precious time doing that but what the hell? That's up to them.
I actually thought it was clever that that member took the time to try and get the 10.

So...my query is..does anybody think that's fair to be banned for Googling or is this Hostess trying to dictate to us how we play?

Regards,

Dec (Strum)

You will get very divided feelings on this issue! Some players definitely consider googling as tantamount to cheating, as they feel they are pitting their personal knowledge and speedy reflexes against others. I belong to the group who feel that research is fine, since the extra time taken is its own handicap, and it is all about learning as you go. You might as well find out the new information as you are answering the questions instead of waiting for someone else to tell you the answer. The issue iof googling has been extensively debated here in the forums, with no concensus being reached.

I would also like to remind everyone that not every 160-second quiz means that the taker googled or otherwise looked answers up. I can't tell you how many times my answers just don't take on the first two or three or four times I click or double click. Sometimes, when they finally go through, I get the message that I've already taken the quiz, and can't even see which ones I got right or wrong. When this happens, my times are inflated, and I didn't google. So if it happens to me, it happens to others. Not everyone has the fastest connections and the newest equipment.

Regardless of your feelings about Googling, in my opinion, for a private quiz, the quiz host has the right to ban anyone he/she wants.

I agree with Mike - you say it yourself, her tournaments and her rules!

I agree - she has the right to do whatever she wants.

That said, however, players also have the right to play or leave any private tourney and if I had been a player in that tourney, I would probably leave and never come back. A tourney host can set rules and enforce them but banning a player without warning because they once violated a rule that possibly wasn't even clearly communicated before - at least not with these consequences - is a style of leadership I would not wish to play under.

The Cat People have their tourney and the intro page says "please do not google, this is for fun". I am also pretty sure one member does at least occasionally look up answers but yet I would never ban him from the event just for that - it would be handing out a severe penalty without proof!

I think I'm the banned player. Strum, I wrote Deborah about it. I made it clear that there's just as much skill in googling as there is in memorizing answers after having seen them over and over again. After all, I do just as well in P of C as I do in WTS or FMI. I play so many private tournaments anyway. I won't miss playing one out of the dozen or so I play every day. If folks are looking for purity in their games, they will inevitably be disappointed. She grants folks the use of the hall, it's her rules. I've since shrugged it off. Don't sweat it too much Strum.

-Dave

I'm glad to hear it's not a problem for you, cubswin2323, but I still dislike a snap judgement made without proof. haven't any of you gotten a phone call in the middle of one of these quizzes or gotten otherwise distracted and then submitted your answers late? There are so many ways other than googling to have a long quiz time.

If a player has difficulty reading due to vision handicaps, high scores are par for the course. But then that exhibits itself on every test not just once in a while.

So Cubby, did you get to take your virtual flower vase and virtual hot dog with you when you were cast out into the cold?

Yes it was you Cubs. I thought it was ridiculous but there you go.
Thanks for all the replies folks.

I will never be afraid to stick my neck out there. I believe in freedom. Freedom in what one says, freedom in how one plays. That is ABSOLUTE! BE BRAVE!

-Dave Miller

I wasn't given a home version of the game if that's what you mean. Meh, I overcome mehaul. Arrogant or not, I'm too damned good to let that bother me. Fleas and flies son, fleas and flies. Easily flicked off. Ha!

-Dave

"Winner!"

-C.Sheen

If I inject myself with tiger blood, is that illegal doping under FT rules? I haven't read any rule against it. Just wondering.

It was far from a snap judgment, and there was plenty of proof. We PBSers are a Google free team. None of us do it, and none of us like it. When we compete against other players, we do it with only what's in our head. We don't know an answer? We roll the dice and take what score is given to us. There is no skill in Googling. Anybody can get all the questions right when the answers are given to them.

If we're following the immortal words of Mr. Sheen, then you might as well close your eyes and make it so with the power of your mind.

Anton, can you PROVE that not even ONE of your team members has googled even a single answer? I believe googling takes just as much "skill" as it does to memorize answers from questions you've seen in the past and have just grown to recall the correct answer. How many of us got 10 right in the easy game the very first time we played, and in a quick time? How many of us aced the daily game without any previous knowledge of the questions? A very tiny number, for sure. Googling and memorizing aren't much different, in my opinion.

If someone doesn't think Googling takes any skill, and they think that their scores without Googling are totally fair and equal scores, they are very wrong. They have memorized the answers, and in essense, they have researched the answer by using the question itself previously.


I think both ways are perfectly fine; we all memorize answers, and there is no way around it. Only a few Google. So those who don't like our Googling shouldn't complain.

Yes, I can. Every single person on my team gets horrible scores from time to time. What does that mean? They guessed and didn't look up the answer.



Googling and memorizing are as different as night and day. memorizing happens when either you guess and get it wrong and guess and get it right. Either way you didn't look up the answer to assure you get it right.



This makes no sense Swami. You are saying that a player remembering the answer they got in a previous game is the same as looking up the answer to pad their score. Come on, Swami. What skill is there when Google is doing the work for you?




Imagine this scenario: Everybody who has played a certain game has struggled and the top score is a 6/10. Along comes a player who takes almost three minutes and gets them all right. That's an obvious Google job, and that player did not earn the win You'd be ok with that?

This is an issue that has been discussed many times and Terry has altered many games to give clear penalties for those who take their time to complete the timed quizzes. Unfortunately, Googling is one of those topics that will have both supporters and opposition and Terry has made it a point that it's not cheating. Some games promote it and some do not.

What about two people working on the same account to complete a quiz? Is that fair? Combined, if two people answer the questions together and win the quiz in a shorter time than everyone else, are they entitled to the win even if everyone else played solo?

Unfortunately, there's no way to stop this. This may be one of those ones where people have to agree to disagree. There's no point in flogging a dead horse.

That does not mean they didn't look up answers. I can google and get 6/10 right in 200 seconds. A bad score does NOT mean that they don't Google, not even once. Also, it doesn't mean a Googler googles EVERY game. 6/10 correct might not be googling, but then the next hour they might get 10 in 150 seconds.



Googling isn't doing the work for anybody. Looking up the answer will get you to remember it next time. Just like randomly guessing, and then using that question as "research" so you can get it right next time. Both are ways to memorize the question to be able to correctly answer it next time.



I never said that. And no, it's not always a Google job. Some people are smart, but slow. Doesn't mean they Googled. And seriously, Anton, does Googling ever win the easy game or the hard game or the daily game? No. Speed wins. Have you EVER seen 10 right in 3 minutes with the rest with only 6 right? In expert, sometimes, yes. That's it. Googling isn't always a surefire way to win. Sometimes Googling is not worth it, because the speed demons will cream whatever score Googling will get.

Then, of course, in expert, you might see 15 in 100 seconds. Doesn't always mean Googling, because that person might just actually be an expert in the category.

If I could stop Googling across the entire FunTrivia community for an entire day, I would, that way you could see that Googling is NOT the reason people win all the time. Look at Incognito101, for instance. How many people would agree that she never Googled? Most, if not all, would believe so. What were her scores? 15 in 74 seconds in obscurity. She could score very highly, and though the times were sometimes slow, she didn't Google.


And of course, there are those who Google, but STILL beat Speed demons. If you see a score of 15 in 50 seconds, you might think "they didn't Google". This is the Totally wrong thinking. Some people are super fast Googlers. Also, sometimes just one answer needs to be Googled. I know I have managed 15 in 35 seconds in a category or two, with Googling ONE answer to just to be sure I got it right. You can't judge people based on times and number correct. It doesn't mean Googling necessarily, and fast times with all of them right doesn't necessarily mean they didn't Google, either.



As Kyle stated, it's not something that can be stopped. This argument will get nowhere. Nothing will come from this. It's a lose lose situation for everybody. If you're good with it, Anton, I'd like to not argue about this any longer. This is my last post on this board.

Ok, if you think my team Googles, then why are we not consistently getting very slow times, or consistently high percentages right? We have plenty of bad days. believe me, my team does not Google.




Google looks up and supplies the answer for you. How is the player doing any of the work? Guessing and memorizing an answer is nowhere near the same thing since it is the player using only what is in their head and no outside sources.





yes, I have seen a 10/10 in three minutes with the rest only getting a high of 6/10. Why do you think I used that example? far better players than the one who Googled were struggling with that game and this player gets them all right in three minutes? That will always be a Google job. No, it wasn't in the hourlies. Yes, I have seen a Googler win the hard game. That is one game where it is possible to be successful using Google.



No, it doesn't always mean Googling took place. You're right about that. There is another factor in play too. You have to look at the rest of the field. There are topics where everybody struggles. If a player who has a history of getting fast times consistently gets times much slower than the rest of the field with getting all of the answers right when all the others struggled to get half right, obviously something is off.



When did I say Google was the reason some players win all the time?

And for the record, I am not arguing. This isn't the first time I've been accused of arguing when all I am doing is simply stating my opinion while discussing a subject.I know why though, and I also understand why.

I'm not saying you have ANY people who do nothing BUT google. But I'm sure that on occasion, at least ONE of your members has Googled. Sometimes, I google all 10 answers, and get only 6 right in 100 seconds. Bad scores does not mean you don't Google.



So do Googlers.



A topic where everyone struggles and someone gets a high score does NOT mean they are Googling. For instance, in "Science Fiction", most of the questions were Star Wars books, so I was able to get 14 or 15 right in a somewhat slow time. Did I google, no, I did not. Was the average high? No, two, maybe three scores were over 1,000 points. Had you seen this score, and how everyone else was struggling, would you have thought I Googled? Probably. But I didn't. I KNOW the category. How many people struggle in a certain game does not prove anything. One person could happen to know some answers others do not know.



I think you and I can both agree that neither of us are simply "stating an opinion". If we were both simply "stating an opinion", we wouldn't continue to post quotes from each other, arguing why that person is wrong, or explaining the opinion of the other based on a sentence. I'll admit I am arguing with you, and it will get neither of us anywhere. I know I said with my last post that I would not post again, and I just did, but I do mean it this time. I am done arguing. My rant is over, and I for one don't think either one of us is right or wrong. Let's simply stop "stating our opinions" and move on. Nothing will result from it, anyway.

Other then for the Obscure Researcher badge and Bus Ride I don't see a need for googling.

For me googling isn't about learning the answers, it's about getting higher scores in an easy manner.

You will get the answers after you click submit and see how you did on your own and in a faster time then it would take to google answers.

You can usually learn a lot more by always reading the interesting information provided by the writers then by googling for quick answer only.

Googling does take skill for tough questions, but they are completely different skills then it takes to figure the answers out yourself or take your best educated guess.

I say leave it up to the tournament hosts as to how they want to run their tournaments.

Neither of my eyes go googley anymore! Is that what this was about? I don't get how crossing your eyes could make you any faster (except in the new Mind Melt drop downs perhaps).

I fully agree with that assessment and suggestion. Thanks

You still get the benefit of the author's information whether you google or guess. You can learn something either way, no impact on the argument. I am baffled why guessing takes more work than googling, but I guess we all have our own opinions.

And, for those that have teams that never Google? Why would any 10 or 15 question game take over two minutes? That baffles me. Deep thoughts leading to guessing?

Sigh. You are both correct.

On a fifteen question quiz, I seldom break the 120 second barrier and I do not google. Some of us just take longer than others for physical reasons to read and enter our answers. That, sweet one who puts up with Dave, is why some take more than two minutes for a quiz and not just because searching is taking place.

LOL! You make me giggle. Dave is a joy. And in some cases, yes, it is just a slower read and action, and sometimes it just isn't. Again, can't be assumed. And the arrogance inherent in making proclamations about an entire team is just odd. I can get a 32 second googled round or a 120 non-googled.

I also resent that.

In Expert, it can depend on the category... I like when the subjects such as Social Science or Psychology come up... I spent enough time reading about/researching those topics for four years in school, I have no need to Google, but I usually have quite slow times in those categories because of the nature of the questions, usually they are either a bit lengthy or they simply need to be read slowly to fully understand, and I need to think about the answers because even if I don't immediately know, I know I know somewhere in my mind and I try to find it rather than just pick one and move on quickly. So, long story short - depends on the game and the questions!

Bubbles, I would say making educated guesses takes more personal brain power. Often an answer to the question can be in my own brain somewhere, just takes a few more seconds to come out than other answers.

Whether it be long questions, me trying to read to fast and having to reread questions, getting stuck on a question I know I should know the answer to but can't come up with it at the moment are a few ways I end up with around 10 seconds per question.

Not to stick my head in the lion's, I mean tiger's mouth but...

To quote the wisdom of the great Ron Burgundy: Agree to disagree! Look how he handled the disagreement of how San Diego, CA got it's name with his future wife Veronica Corningstone. I think we need to ask ourselves: What would Ron Burgundy do? BTW, he actually gets his wisdom from that little Buddha with hair of his Baxter! Let us try to emulate their example of wisdom and tolerance.

All I know is this--my original question from earlier today STILL wasn't adequately answered except by maybe kyle. So am I stuck using the power of my mind to make it so with the use of the tiger blood? Well, I'm using tiger blood until I'm told I can't.

A round of drinks for everybody. Burgundy's buying!

I guess I will just have to say I disagree. I don't think guessing takes a lot of effort. At all. Googling is almost a science when you try and find the fewest words that will get you where you need to be. Ah, the joy of different opinions.

I don't remember anyone googling more than a couple of years ago, then a few people thought of it and some more joined them. On the timed games I can't see the point as the timing takes away the option of research normally, as all the other multitude of quizzes can take a day if you really want to (a few brain twists have for me in the past) and if you need a decent score to qualify for something then that's when you need to search. But the last thing I thought of personally for a timed quiz is to look up an answer on a separate tab when going for a decent time. The difference between memorising and looking is the same as someone asking you a question and you know it or they could look it up for themselves without asking you. Doctors memorise diseases and lawyers memorise cases or they'll fail their exams. If not then they'd just be given a computer and they could look them up instead. Not a comparison. The same goes for live quizzes like Mastermind. They are totally based on a capacity to memorise and nothing else, and if that is the skill being tested it's the sole criterion but an equally valid one as any other in a specific competition. In fact the quizzes rely on a lot of elimination and logic before the questions are memorised, and then if familiar enough it is a pure test of memory. Nobody ever gets better at googling or would have a googling contest, it would test nothing at all if using identical computers.

Do you think lawyers have all their case law memorized when they are actually PRACTICING law? If that's the case, the paralegal profession would be in SERIOUS trouble!

Wild guessing doesn't take effort or usually help. In multiple choice ansswer situations a person can exclude some of the wrong answers or break a word they don't know down by it's part to help make a better guess.

As I menitoned earlier I recognize that googling takes skill, but it's a different skill set from making educated guesses, they are like apple and oranges.

But the best lawyers can approach the same case in multiple fashions. Knowing what aspects would be bset to focus on and how to present thier version of the facts is what seperates one lawyer from the rest.

If I'm looking at possibly being put on death row, I'll take the lawyer who finds the answers which will win my case rather than one who goes off the top of his head.

If we're equating playing games here with having your life on the line, we're taking this whole thing far too seriously. They're games - you win some, you lose some, some get rained out - or your server crashes in the middle of it all. Some people like to memorise things, some people like to develop skills at looking things up quickly. I take around 5 seconds per question even if I know the answer after seeing the first word, because my computer-manipulation skills aren't crash hot, which is why the Easy Game is not one in which I can make much contribution to my team's scores. But they put up with me.

And I'd rather take the doctor who can cure me quicker knowing the answer than the one who decides to Google the symptoms when I should really be getting into the O-R.

Again, it's not really possible to sway anyone on this matter. Some will Google and some will not. There's not really a right side and a wrong side here, and it's a non-issue which likely won't be looked into. Terry started this thread to clear up the question once and for all, but people don't seem to be too satisfied with the choice to let it lie.

Where did that dead horse go?

Hope you enjoyed the chicken, and please tip the wait staff!

I googled 'quick smarmy reply' and got: "That was chicken? I thought it tasted like Armadillo de Amarillo."

And let me just say that slow times can be due to slow connections, phones ringing, reading questions incorrectly and having to reread, or myriad other reasons. Some slow times are due to googling, but others are due to the reasons I've stated.

I couldn't agree more with you. I just had someone ring my doorbell while I was trying to finish a quiz. Let me tell you, my time was a bit longer.
Connections have also gone down. Had to have the cable company replace their line due to the squirrels gnawing on it.
Yep, many reasons for longer times.

I'm ALL about smarmy MeHaul! C'Mon man! You know that about me from the Great Dave Team Search. Actuallly, I like to think of myself as more snarky rather than smarmy! I know you were kidding when you said to Alex about the "put up with Dave" thing! (fist bump) You're a TOTALLY great guy! Wish you were with us! I want you on my team. Please.

Obviously not, but believe me coming from a legal family you never forget the cases you learnt at college when you need them. But they still have to prove it before they're allowed to practice. As for memory here if I haven't played a category for a while and see an old familiar question I may still forget the answer where greater minds will not. That edge makes quite a difference.

These are my feelings too. I'll take the person who already knows what they are doing over the one who thinks they are as good as the rest.



True, but I'd still like to understand the reasoning why some players need to Google. Is it a fear of looking bad? Could it be a desire some players feel to want to be able to keep up with the great ones? It might not even be a deep issue. It could be that they just don't like the color red. I need to know, Kyle. I love studying people and understanding why they do the things they do.

For me, Anton, it's not about looking bad, or trying to keep up, it's simply preferring to see green. Even if I get 10 in 200 seconds, and get a score of, you know, 400 points, I for some reason prefer that over 6 right in 50 seconds for 500. lol. I don't really know why, actually.

I have no issue with curiosity, it was more of a matter with the way you presented an argument about why Googling was bad in a thread explaining that nothing would/could be done about it. Since this is a feedback forum, it's fine to state an opinion about certain aspects of the site, by all means, but this one was kind of a done deal and dialectics may only lead some less-frequent readers into assuming that changes will be made.

Just trying to maintain order and prevent arguments where they're not needed is all.

I think we've done this death; this discussion has gone on for 8 months.
Thread closed, and stickied to the top of the forum.