Moderators: Fatmo, JonS, Buachaille
InterMPC wrote:raphtown wrote:This sounds like a good idea, except that experience might not always match up to skill (some starters on playdip might be quite good). An idea similar to this one would be that everyone has a point value from 0 to 100 representative of their skill (this can be initialized based on the membership ranking) and you somehow factor the combined loser's score with the combined winner's score to determine points gained/lost. Thoughts?
I like the concept. Here are a few issues to be aware of.
1. If we have a system where you can lose points and there is a cap on how high your score can go, we may see a scenario where people think it’s in their best interest to not play classicist games. E.g. I’m on 99 points (because I’m so awesome). I can’t get higher than 100, but I can certainly drop considerably. Isn’t it best for me just to not play anymore so I can stay on top of the table?
2. We need to define at exactly what point in time we take peoples score for calculation. What I mean by this is; let’s say I start a game and I have 50 points. Just before the game finishes, I have dropped to 45 points because I lost a different game in the mean time. Do we use 45 or 50 to calculate scores for that game?
3. The spreadsheet to be able to handle the table is possible, but would require a lot of work. One solution being that we manually enter each game in to the spreadsheet, which players are participating and what their starting score is, that will be used to calculate the result. We then enter the result into the spreadsheet and the spreadsheet automatically allocates new scores and updates the table. The spreadsheet will be able to handle a limited amount of games using this method though.
4. How do you calculate peoples starting scores? Who decides? Is it fairer to just start everyone on 50 and let their new results determine how they climb? People’s appropriate ranking would quickly come to fruition.
Issue 1 is the biggest concern for me, as the others are all quite fixable.
InterMPC wrote:Okay, I've added an Elo style rating system to the spreadsheet located here - https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key ... y=COvq2tcK
Have a play and let me know what you think.
The 'K-Factor' and the 'Results Weighting' can be changed to get more desirable results. I think it's worth debating what these should be. In Chess the results weighting is 1 for a win, 0 for a loss and .5 for a draw. The K-Factor fluctuates between 10 and 25 depending on how many games you have played.
Also the Elo formula uses a 'predicted' result based on the two participating players. As we have 7 players per game I've had to use a different method for calculating the predicted results. (currently invisible in the spreadsheet.)
Again, the white cells have data you can manipulate while the coloured cells have formulas.
I'm eager to get everyone's input. - Enjoy
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests