*** Ratings Updated ***
BerXpert Added to High Voltage. Thanks Jpww.
Call to Power -- Play-by-Email Ratings and Rankings
Last Updated: 6-MAY-2001 (updated every Sunday at 23:00 Apolyton Time)
CTP. . APOLYTON HANDLE........ CTP... P.G. P.G.
RANK P NAME................... RATING WIN. LOSS NAT.TR
0001 . MOBIUS................. 23.267 0033 0002 GBR.EN
0002 . KLAIR.................. 23.206 0027 0000 FRA...
0003 . RICK_ELKINS............ 22.487 0023 0010 USA.NY
0004 . SWISSY................. 21.895 0018 0003 USA.IL
0005 . STAVROS................ 21.666 0079 0031 GER...
0006 . BERXPERT............... 21.441 0032 0003 MEX...
0007 P DEVIL.................. 20.927 0005 0002 LAT...
0008 . SLAMP.................. 20.914 0022 0008 FRA...
0009 . ST_JON................. 20.892 0050 0046 GBR.EN
0010 . BILHQ.................. 20.788 0012 0004 INA...
0011 . MAX_WEBSTER............ 20.624 0016 0011 CAN...
0012 . ZOBOZEWARRIOR.......... 20.611 0018 0006 FRA...
0013 P VITOLG................. 20.476 0004 0003 ISR...
0014 . QUINNS................. 20.410 0070 0056 USA.CA
0015 . FRAZE.................. 20.379 0020 0031 GBR...
0016 . NOTUNCOMMON............ 20.358 0018 0011 DEN...
0017 . JPWW................... 20.055 0016 0003 USA.GA
0018 P FUZZBALL............... 20.029 0003 0004 AUS...
0019 . NUKE_BOY............... 19.871 0032 0014 USA.FL
0020 . FRANSES................ 19.796 0030 0023 NED...
0021 . THEBIRDMAN............. 19.551 0078 0053 DEN...
0022 . KRALJ_MATJAZ........... 19.503 0041 0013 SLO...
0023 . KRASH.................. 19.493 0015 0012 GBR.EN
0024 . PAUL................... 19.460 0024 0042 NED...
0025 . KING_THOR.............. 19.442 0038 0072 USA.FL
0026 . KEYGEN................. 19.217 0018 0018 GRE...
0027 . LUNG................... 19.215 0021 0018 AUS.SW
0028 . 420.................... 19.090 0017 0017 USA.IL
0029 . SADDAM................. 19.050 0012 0006 USA.WI
0030 P EOHIAN................. 19.049 0003 0000 USA.CA
0031 . MAESTRO................ 18.592 0004 0010 BEL...
0032 . ARTHUR................. 18.494 0014 0039 USA.UT
0033 . DUCK_HUNTER............ 18.450 0007 0020 USA.FL
0034 . YETI................... 18.175 0012 0009 USA.WI
0035 . DUGRIK................. 18.171 0008 0009 USA.TX
0036 P BONAPARTE II........... 17.900 0000 0000 USA.NY
0037 . SOLVER................. 17.798 0018 0042 LAT...
0038 P ELROND................. 17.750 0000 0000 GER...
0039 . PHOENIXCAGER........... 17.719 0010 0011 SGP...
0040 . PN..................... 17.329 0007 0012 GBR.EN
0041 . DARTH_VIPER............ 17.105 0018 0041 NED...
0042 . THE_TRUE_DEMOSTHENES... 17.041 0006 0057 GBR.EN
0043 . SYORIS................. 16.898 0004 0006 GBR.EN
0044 . CUAICH................. 16.782 0004 0008 CAN.ON
P = Provisional. Player has had less than 10 power graph results.
Frequently Asked Questions
How do I become rated? Simply post, to this thread, the highest level of victory that you ever attained, (Chieftain, Warlord, Prince, King, Emperor, or Deity), in a "single player" game of Call to Power, along with the Nation and Territory that you presently reside. That's it! You'll see your name appear on the above list within a week.
How do the ratings change? See the below CTP Ratings Links section for an in depth discussion.
On whose turn should the Power Graph be reported? It doesn't matter because the Power Graph remains the same during the cycle of the turn. However, we recommend that the 1st player (blue) always report the Power Graph results.
Adjustments to Ratings
New Players to Add:
Pending *9th Turn Processing:
Pending Elimination:
Pending Delinquency Adjustment (- 0.1 points):
Current Rated Games In Progress*:
(Turn rating started in parentheses)
1. R2_Islands(0) - Solver, Fraze, King Thor, Kralj Matjaz, Quinns.
2. Love_Conquers?(50) - St Jon, Mobius, (Keygen), Stavros, Rick Elkins, King Thor.
3. Eagles_at_War(0) - TheBirdMan, Solver, Kralj Matjaz, Notuncommon, Fraze, Krash, Arthur, Quinns.
4. Lung's_Fast(86) - Lung, Stavros, Paul, St Jon, TheBirdMan.
5. Do_Some_PBEM(49) - Solver, TheBirdMan, (Blackice), Paul, Krash, (Stavros).
6. Fixed_Game(30) - King Thor, Stavros, (PN), Keygen, Quinns.
7. Team_Horses(0) - ZoboZeWarrior, Darth Viper, (Blackice), Quinns, Franses, Nuke Boy.
8. Monkey_1(187) - Yeti, (TheBirdMan), Swissy, (Nuke Boy), Slamp, Paul, (Max Webster), (Fraze).
9. Monkey_2(226) - Yeti, (Max Webster), (Germans - A/I), Lung, Paul, (Zaphod), (TheBirdMan).
10. Conquer!!!(23) - Bilhq, TheBirdMan, (SADDAM), Stavros, Paul, King Thor, (Jafo).
11. Giant_Bird(29) - TheBirdMan, (Stavros), Notuncommon, Franses, Darth Viper, (King Thor).
12. Dutcheese(119) - (Fraze), TheBirdMan, Klair, Duck_Hunter, Max_Webster King_Thor, Slamp, St_Jon.
13. Youngbloods(0) - 420, Darth_Viper, Kralj_Matjaz, Phoenixcager, BerXpert, (Blackice).
14. Fly High(29) - TheBirdMan, Notuncommon, Krash, (Fraze), King_Thor, (Arthur), Bilhq.
15. Team Spirit(29) - Stavros, Franses, Keygen, Arthur, Maestro, TheBirdMan, Swissy, King Thor
16. Veterans In Arms(0) - Keygen, TheBirdMan, Paul, Slamp, The_True_Demosthenes, Swissy
17. Young v. Old Blood(0) - Keygen, (Blackice), St_Jon, Yeti, TheBirdMan, 420
18. Youngbloods Gathering(0) - Phoenixcager, (Blackice), 420, BerXpert, Yeti, Saddam
19. Another World(0) - Darth_Viper, Bonaparte_II, 420, Nuke_Boy, Dugrik, Saddam
20. Lungmatch 2.1(66) - Max_Webster, Lung, Arthur
21. Lungmatch 2.2(0) - Keygen, Solver, Swissy
22. Strife(0) - ZoboZeWarrior, PN, Jpww, (Blackice), Nuke_Boy, Cuaich
23. Lungmatch 3.2(8) - The_True_Demosthenes, Mobius, TheBirdMan
24. Swissy2(238) - The_True_Demosthenes, Mobius, Lung, (Moral Hazard)
25. High Voltage(0) - PN, Jpww, (Blackice), Dugrik, BerXpert, Eohian
26. T.N.T.(0) - Fuzzball, Vitolg, DeVil, Nuke Boy, (Blackice), BerXpert
* A player in parentheses is unrated in that game.
-----------------
Related CTP PBEM Ratings Links
TENPL639_AM --- Rankings for Apolyton Call to Power Play-by-Email (PBEM).
TENPL641_AM --- History of Ratings for Apolyton Call to Power PBEM.
TEN619_AM --- *9th Turn Game Results for Apolyton Call to Power PBEM.
RATINGS FORMULAS --- Formulas Used in Determining Ratings Calculations.
PBEM LADDERS thread --- Early Discussions on the Foundation of the CTP PBEM Rating System.
POPULATION GROWTH TABLES --- CTP City Population Growth Tables.
POWER GRAPH INTERPRETED --- Discussions on Call to Power's Power Graph.
COMPANY, BATTALION, BRIGADE, DIVISION... YIKES --- Discussions on the Standarization of the Groupings of Military Units in CTP.
-----------------
TENPL639_AM Report Legend:
NAT.TR - Nation and Territory of Primary Residence.
PBEM RATING - Starts with an initial value depending upon the highest CtP AI level ever honestly defeated: Chieftain=14; Warlord=16; Prince=17; King=18; Emperor=19; Deity=21. This rating changes by winning or losing to other rated players, (at the *9 turn mark every ten turns), while playing "rated" PBEM games. See the CtP Multiplayer topic "PBEM Ladders" for details on how this rating change is calculated.
-------------------
TEN619_AM Report Concepts:
Win/Loss - A Win counts by having a "higher" Power Graph rating at the ten turn mark during a "rated" game. For example, in a five player game, at the ten turn mark, each player will receive four results - 4 wins and 0 losses, or 3 wins and 1 loss, etc.
Delinquency - 24 or more hours late counts as a delinquency. Each delinquency deducts -0.1 ratings points from player's rating.
Inactivity Adjustment - Players will lose 5/100ths of a ratings point (-0.05) for each month they go without a ratings adjustment, (i.e. remain inactive in the ratings for an entire month).
-----------------
Elimination Rule
If, in a rated game, a player:
a) resigns;
b) changes status from "rated" to "unrated";
c) gets annihilated; or
d) gets "next turned" for three turns in a row,
then every remaining player in that game "DEFEATS" THAT PLAYER THREE TIMES (as measured by the normal ten turn phase defeat).
For example, in a 5 player game, the first person who gets "eliminated from the ratings in that game" would be "defeated" 12 times (as measured by the normal power graph 10 turn defeat), (3 multiplied by 4 remaining players.) This equates to an average decrease in ratings of about 2 to 3 points for the eliminated player. The second player eliminated would be defeated 9 times (3 multiplied by 3 remaining players), ... etc.
In the case of resignation or three consecutive "next turns", then that resigned player's civilization will be "next turned" until a replacement player, (either rated or unrated), takes over that civilization's control.
-----------------
Alien Life Victory Rule
If a player wins by completing the Alien Project, then that player defeats every remaining player three times.
-----------------
Rating Change Table: - (example +2 to -2)
DIFFERENCE.. RATING
IN RATINGS.. CHANGE (+ for winner, - for loser)
+2.0 ........ 0.083
+1.5 ........ 0.118
+1.0 ........ 0.167
+0.5 ........ 0.222
=0.0 ........ 0.250
-0.5 ........ 0.278
-1.0 ........ 0.333
-1.5 ........ 0.382
-2.0 ........ 0.417
*** NOTICE TO ALL GAME STARTERS IN RATED GAMES ***
Please post all of your turn *9 power graph results to the latest CTP Ratings thread (this thread). (I don't look at all of the game threads in progress.)
Also, a reminder that all APPLICATIONS FOR NEW RATED GAMES need to be posted here with:
1. Official game name;
2. Player list (in turn order) of all players' APOLYTON HANDLES (no nick names please). Place players that wish to be "unrated" in parentheses;
3. All desired rated players must have a current rating -- (please state their initial rating if they do not have a current rating).
4. The current turn number;
5. The turn number you want the game to become "rated".
[This message has been edited by quinns (edited May 09, 2001).]
Last edited by quinns; May 26, 2001 at 14:13.
*** Ratings Updated ***
BerXpert Added to High Voltage. Thanks Jpww.
You're Welcome
Also turn eohian to rated in High Voltage whenever you can.
I wish to be unrated in all games please.
Thanks
Turn 69 Fixed Game Power Graph:
Stavros
King Thor
Quinns
Keygen
(PN)
***
Blackice, you will receive substantial penalties for changing status from rated to unrated in the rated games in which you are participating. We can make the adjustment and then remove your name from the list as we did Aaginor, if you like.
quote:
Originally posted by blackice on 04-29-2001 08:11 PM
I wish to be unrated in all games please.
Thanks
Why? You are one of the highest rated players.
quote:
Originally posted by quinns on 04-29-2001 08:22 PM
Turn 69 Fixed Game Power Graph:
Stavros
King Thor
Quinns
Keygen
(PN)
***
Blackice, you will receive substantial penalties for changing status from rated to unrated in the rated games in which you are participating. We can make the adjustment and then remove your name from the list as we did Aaginor, if you like.
Hey Quinns, did you update the Ratings chart? I need all the wins that I can get. I have the maximum number of losses, and my rating reflects it.
.. Boy! I must SUCK!
Yes please Quinns, remove me.
Blackice, do you want to share with us why you want to be removed? As Keygen mentioned you are one of the highest ranked players and I am very curious about the reasoning behind it.
I sure hope you will continue playing?
Something wrong with th TEN619_AM APLOLYTON CTP PBEM RESULTS???
Last results are from the 15.april 2001?!
Yes, Birdman. I uploaded the new results to my web host, but they have an old version of the files for some reason. They won't respond (pitiful web host). I'm switching to Addr.com web hosting now. I'm transferring my domain name to them soon. In the mean time, I'm pointing directly to the new site now, so try it at 16:00 GMT today. It should be alright.
Quinns
[This message has been edited by quinns (edited May 01, 2001).]
Quinns, your proposal sounds good but new people like to see their names in the ranking from the start. Perhaps you should add them at the end of the ranking (including their rating) untill they have played the number of turns you propose after which they get their rightfull place in the ranking?
Or more easily - put them where they belong (as you do now)!
But give them an * ín front of their rating, showing that this position is only "theoretic" until their first official rating.
Personal I have no trouble diving down to xxx-position as long as I know some of the players above are wannabees. And that we all know about this.
But surely I can see the difference, when the weekly list are made official at Apolytons. Then I would suggest "something different". I do not know what excactly but:
If you should consider any possible situation - games/wins/losses, then fx. Klair should have a kind of deduction (do not know the right term) but she is only playing in one game - and (among others) King Thor should have some positive regulations due to his many rated games. As it is now, if you are in only one game and in that game is a (safe) lead - then you cannot be kicked from the CTP-thrown.
And Blackice, keep your position here. I do understand you. BUT I have also taken some -points in DC, which I (still) do not think I deserve (turn 119 and a misreported position in turn 139).
But I can live with this and so can you - you are a very good player, I know it from the moves you do when you are subbing me!
Max/Bird
I think it would be better to start a new topic where to post every weak point of the ratings. There have past at list 6 months from the beginning of the rating system. We have the experience to post some safe results for they way the ranking work after a long period of evaluation. There are many things to discuss in my oppinion. Either Solver or Quinns should post the new topic.
quote:
Originally posted by TheBirdMan on 05-01-2001 02:33 PM
Or more easily - put them where they belong (as you do now)!
But give them an * ín front of their rating, showing that this position is only "theoretic" until their first official rating...
I agree with the Birdman on this!
Hummm I am a bit discouraged here Quinns that was just a very small reason.
I hope no gets this wrong it is a bit messy the way things are done. It simply does not make much sense and did not when I signed up. I took a .05 loss necause the game did not start in the time frame. Like so what you can beat deity, the difference between this PBEM and online gaming is huge. You simply can not play the same way. But there are several reasons and that is a small one.
I also had said to Quinns and Franses (Thanks Franses) I did not want to post my reasons as they were of course personal and did not want to ruffle feathers, or discourage people from playing this great way PBEM. It is a riot and I would encourage anyone to play and have as much fun as I am having.
As I said I have 17 games on the go, obviously I like it heh. I forgive but am a bit disapointed that my desire to keep it to myself has been posted. More importantly only part of the reason was posted giving in my opinion the wrong impression for the reasons. But moving on cuz I have a game to play, more importantly the style of play is sooo different from online civ. big time. I just feel that my objective in one ladder is being affected by the other style of play. For you that can relate it's like playing darts, baseball and bowling all at the same time heh.
Here is my senario at turn say 40 or so my strategy kicks in ok I am fist over all but for four turns I have taken a bath in the ratings as I have been beaten by lower ranked players. The points ratio I will recieve by beating lower ranked players will never match the points I lost to begin with. In GL play you have the choice of who to play. Obviously you don't play lower ranked people, believe me I know heh 12th to 29th in five of games unless of course your name is Zeratul lol and even he can be sellective of his win losss points ratio. So the choice is yours who you play for points. That gives you control on how much you win or lose and how many points it is going to be. Here no, most players are as Quinns points out new comers, so it is obvious that these baths per ten turns will be endless especially at the starting rank. But the big difference is how much of a bath you take and how much of a win you take.
To me projecting into the future your loses will continually exceed your wins, points wise with my style of play. This was made clear to me with the last rankings, I had two first place finishes and one forth, the forth place finish not only wiped out the two first places but took more points than both wins were worth. I lost points? Ok so if I stay on top for two of them and forth place in the other I will be at the bottom of the rankings in two months lol. Personaly that simply makes no sense, at all.
If I continue to be first those players will continue to be lower ranked.
Therefore in each game I play where I win I have less points than the turns I lose, heh.
Unless they play other games and I hit bottom and they move above me then of course I will gain points until they get below me again by my wins over them and by the loss you take vs the gains you make that won't take long long. Heh see what I mean? Anyone? lol Feel free to correct me if I am wrong.
Thanks TheBirdMan I always wondered if I did your top notch style of play (as I know I played your civ.) justice. :0)
Quinns that is a great idea have a waiting to be ranked area like newbies ladder Heh let the games begin :0)
Blackice
[This message has been edited by blackice (edited May 01, 2001).]
Getting beaten by an unrated player doesn't count against you, does it?
Blackice was discouraged by the new players jumping ahead of most everyone in the ratings. I explained to him that the new players win/loss records indicate the "weight" of their ratings, but he was still put off by it. I can understand that. He has a good point. This has surfaced before.
New Proposed Rule
How about this PROVISIONAL rule then:
New players will not show up on the rankings reports until they have had at least 10 Power Graph results. Players with less than 10 Power Graph results will be considered PROVISIONAL and their results will be recorded just as normal, however they will not show in the rankings.
That is, a combination of at least 10 wins and/or losses. I think this is a very fair resolution to this distortion, and prevents players jumping to the top of the rankings without playing a single game. What do you all think?
Blackice makes some good points here but there is something to say for the current system also. I suggest a double ranking system for a while. The second ranking system I propose probably solves the issues raised by Blackice. After a couple of months both ranking systems should come close to eachother and if not we could decide on which one to use. My proposal for the second ranking system is a system simply based on wins/losses. I calculated it for the first 10 with the following result:
1. Stavros +42
2. Klair +27
Mobius +27
Blackice +27
5. Kral-M +25
6. Birdman +23
7. Berxpert +15
8. Swissy +13
9. Elkins +11
10.Slamp +10
Furthermore:
The game is all about winning it. Intermediate results are not that important, especially not because the Power Graph we use for the ranking does not reveal the true strength of a civilization. Yet, games take so long that an intermediate ranking system (or two
For each game ended the winner gets 10 points, second place 5 points (if at least 4 players took part only), third place 3 points (if at least 5 players took part only). The number of points is divided by the number of games played. So, if you ended three games with the positions 1, 3 and 5 you would have (10+3+0)/3=4.33 points.
Frans!
Personally I like your last proposal most. Wonder how our ranking would look like if using this?!
I'll make a calculation later today or tomorrow morning.
Right now the sun is shining (lovely) - and I had better stop playing and go out helping my wife with her customers (selling all kind (nearly) of flowers and trees)
Birdie, buy a portable with a wireless connection and you can do both
I still suggest that we should start a new topic about these problems. There might be many things to discuss. It would be better to have them all together in one relative topic
[This message has been edited by Keygen (edited May 02, 2001).]
I'm agree with Blackice...
...that's all
Edit: I said nothing, quinns have allways the reason. In fact this is HIS rating system, if we don't like it then just go as BlackIce, as the same quinns sugges in the next post.
Me.... let me think about it!
[This message has been edited by berXpert (edited May 02, 2001).]
Not again!
1. Blackice is incorrect about his conclusions regarding unfairly dropping in ratings. I could go on and on with example after example, but he is just mistaken. Trust me.
2. Basing ratings on the number of wins/losses will not work. Take the example of a player with average ability, playing many games against ONLY beginners. This average player would skyrocket to the top due to his enormous number of wins.
3. We already have a system in place now, that rewards players for winning in the end, (as well as punishing "quitters" as berXpert suggested to "cheat" the system). See the "Elimination Rule" above.
4. The current ratings system is now in place, functioning accurately, and is popular with most players. Do you really want to change it (even slightly) and risk losing many participants?
[This message has been edited by quinns (edited May 02, 2001).]
I, for one, did not suggest another rating system. Just a view from another angle TOGETHER with the current system. The data is all there and you must admit that many of the good players show up in the top 10. In the long run the current system may show to be better because it takes account of extra factors but on the short term it has its peculiarities so why not run the two in parallel for a while?
And again, we all know that the only thing that counts is winning a number of games (winning one game does not necessarily mean that you deal with a good player either and even with more games it depends who you play as you pointed out in your message). Intermediate results are fun but some of us will probably win the game without the power graph showing so untill turn 150 or so.
As for me, I am in the ranking for the fun of it and I realise that whatever we come up with it will not be 100% watertight (A "good" system would require many games over a relatively short time which is not feasible with PBEM-CTP). So, if it is decided not to show the extra view that that's OK with me.
OK, no new topic...
What about wonders?
If I start building wonders after wonders in all of my games I will probably end up having the highest ratings of all!
Have you observed how high your power graph jumps when you complete a wonder? Well, a couple of turns later actually...
I don't suggest any change to the rating system. It might have some problems but it's there for quite some time and it shouldn't change at all.
But I suggest to point out all the problems that might have rised to possibly use this knowledge in some other rating system in some other future game, similar to CTP. It could also be helpful and fair for the current rated and future rated players to know among the possitive points of the ratings the negative points too so each one to have a better view of the system and be able to make his desicion easier and not dropping from them after.
"1. Blackice is incorrect about his conclusions regarding unfairly dropping in ratings. I could go on and on with example after example, but he is just mistaken. Trust me."
Teamhorses 4th place 04-28-2001
Starting points 21.723
BLACKICE 21.342
BLACKICE 20.966
BLACKICE 20.542
BLACKICE 20.679 down 1.044
High Voltage 1st place 04-25-2001
Starting points 21.364
BLACKICE 21.401
BLACKICE 21.630
BLACKICE 21.685
BLACKICE 21.723 up .359
Strife 1 st place 04-23-2001
Starting points 20.945
BLACKICE 20.945
BLACKICE 20.991
BLACKICE 21.094
BLACKICE 21.341
BLACKICE 21.364 up .419
Previous rating 008@ 20.995
Current rating 012@ 20.710
Quinns said "-You are quite right. The Rating shown is the
rating BEFORE adjustment. So your last
adjustment was with the 20.679 which then went to
20.710 upon defeating Darth Viper. Your rating
didn't go up that much in your first two games
because of the average lower level of players in
those games. But your recent losses in
Teamhorses set you back because you lost to lower
rated players (me for one
Sorry Quinns remember you posted it first
I don't want to take all this thread up with this I believe Keygen has it right start a new one.
Now please if this win, win, loss continues, explain to me how it can be an incorrect conclusion? Givin the information above?
Keygen has it right with the wonders, it soars right Quinns
Lets say the player that won was playing in five other games and just before he won he passes Keygen in the ratings. He then would be awarded little points for the game win. It would not compare to the ten turn points Keygen would make throughout a 200+ turn game. victory? Especially if the other players in the game were playing other games and were ahead of Keygen in the rankings throughout the game until the end. Cuz lets say he defeats them in this game but loses in the end to the higher ranked player.
How about an email of examples based on what you see above and please correct me if I am wrong.
This point system was based on a tennis ranking system right? Ok what tennis player gets ranked at 5th place over all without beating a single ranked player?
jpww no to your question, I think you were refering to my .5 point loss for inactivity while I was posted with a ranking and waiting for the first game I played to start? Right?
So enough said here lets start a new thread on it...
Blackice, you didn't post the level of players of the games you are winning in. Those wins are against low rated players. We have been through all this before.
Suppose Blackice, rated 21 , plays the following players in 3 different games:
Game 1 --
Bill, rating 10
Joe, rating 8
Sam, rating 6
Game 2 --
Phillip 12
Michael 10
Ernesto 7
Game 3 --
Alfred 21
Bjorn 19
Charlie 18
Blackice wins the first two games hands down, and loses the third game in last place. According to your argument, your rating should go UP for winning the first two games and losing the third game. This is not at all fair. Am I the only one who sees it this way? Look at the LEVEL OF THE PLAYERS DEFEATED IN THE FIRST TWO GAMES.
Forget about the calculation I promised yesterday
Corse now I have read the background and the formulas for the ratingsystem.
My opinion is now, that one thing in Quinns calculations is wrong in all the games.
As this is "one" game I think all the calculation for each player should take start in the position, that this player had to each of the others and not as we do now.
This is how a game was calculated:
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 QUINNS 19.456 ZOBOZEWAR 20.000 0.282
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 QUINNS 19.738 FRANSES 19.240 0.222
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 QUINNS 19.960 BLACKICE 21.746 0.404
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 QUINNS 20.364 NUKE_BOY 19.962 0.231
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 QUINNS 20.595 DARTH_VIP 17.040 0.034
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 ZOBOZEWAR 19.718 FRANSES 19.018 0.201
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 ZOBOZEWAR 19.919 BLACKICE 21.342 0.376
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 ZOBOZEWAR 20.295 NUKE_BOY 19.731 0.216
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 ZOBOZEWAR 20.511 DARTH_VIP 17.006 0.035
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 FRANSES 18.817 BLACKICE 20.966 0.425
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 FRANSES 19.241 NUKE_BOY 19.515 0.259
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 FRANSES 19.500 DARTH_VIP 16.971 0.060
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 BLACKICE 20.542 NUKE_BOY 19.256 0.137
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 BLACKICE 20.679 DARTH_VIP 16.911 0.031
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 NUKE_BOY 19.119 DARTH_VIP 16.880 0.071
And this is how I think it should be calculated:
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 QUINNS 19.456 ZOBOZEWAR 20.000 0.282
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 QUINNS 19.456 FRANSES 19.240 0.244
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 QUINNS 19.456 BLACKICE 21.746 0.431
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 QUINNS 19.456 NUKE_BOY 19.962 0.278
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 QUINNS 19.456 DARTH_VIP 17.040 0.064
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 ZOBOZEWAR 20.000 FRANSES 19.240 0.194
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 ZOBOZEWAR 20.000 BLACKICE 21.746 0.401
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 ZOBOZEWAR 20.000 NUKE_BOY 19.962 0.250
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 ZOBOZEWAR 20.000 DARTH_VIP 17.040 0.046
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 FRANSES 19.240 BLACKICE 21.746 0.440
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 FRANSES 19.240 NUKE_BOY 19.962 0.302
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 FRANSES 19.240 DARTH_VIP 17.040 0.073
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 BLACKICE 21.746 NUKE_BOY 19.962 0.096
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 BLACKICE 21.746 DARTH_VIP 17.040 0.021
04-28-2001 T_HORSES 39 NUKE_BOY 19.962 DARTH_VIP 17.040 0.047
See, there are some differences. It really hurts when beaten by a lower ranked player. In fact that much, that turn to an unrated position in the run are much "cheaper" than stay ranked in a "bad" game if you are in the upper half of the ranks.
and then of course, we miss a colum or two last showing the actual rating points for the players.
Edit: And this would be their ratingpoints:
QUINNS 20,755
ZOBOZEWAR 20,609
FRANSES 19,617
BLACKICE 20,591
NUKE_BOY 19,083
DARTH_VIP 16,789
Edit-edit: How difficult can it be
[This message has been edited by TheBirdMan (edited May 03, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by TheBirdMan (edited May 03, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by TheBirdMan (edited May 03, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by TheBirdMan (edited May 03, 2001).]
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks