21 Jul 08
2 edits
Originally posted by dsmfireOverall site rating won't increase, because RHP is a 'closed' system. (For every plus point, there will be a minus point.)
Is it possible that a rate, say 1700, gives a lower rank now than say one year ago. I believe that I have noticed just that, and it could be due to the RHP overall rating tends to increase. Does it?
However... treading very carefully here... the higher rated end of the tables could be skewed by players striving to gain a higher rating by fair means or foul. The lower ranks will be reduced accordingly.
(2200 now no longer shows on page one)
21 Jul 08
Originally posted by English TalI see your point. Then how come that my highest rating (some months ago)now is some 60-70 ratings lower? Just a matter of statistics and natural variations?
Overall site rating won't increase, because RHP is a 'closed' system. (For every plus point, there will be a minus point.)
However... treading very carefully here... the higher rated end of the tables could be skewed by players striving to gain a higher rating by fair means or foul. The lower ranks will be reduced accordingly.
(2200 now no longer shows on page one)
21 Jul 08
1 edit
Originally posted by dsmfire60 or 70 players could have skipped above your rating artificially😠 Approximate, of course. (This would mean that a lower rated player would increase rating by 60-70, for no extra effort whatsoever!)
I see your point. Then how come that my highest rating (some months ago)now is some 60-70 ratings lower? Just a matter of statistics and natural variations?
In other words: Either... weaker players are becoming weaker... or stronger players are becoming stronger. Take your choice.
21 Jul 08
1 edit
Originally posted by English TalI'm not sure of this...
Overall site rating won't increase, because RHP is a 'closed' system. (For every plus point, there will be a minus point.)
When (1) no new members are introduced in the system, and (2) the same number of rating points are exchanged (which not is the case in ratings over 2100) then I agree with you.
But (1) and (2) makes this balance uneven.
To be sure that 1700 rating points is always the same skill, the average rating of all active players should always be 1200. Without doing the calculations I don't think this is the case. The average is floating around.
Perhaps there is a solution to remedy this average rating floating around, but I don't think it is worth the effort. But until then, I don't think 1700 in rating will have the same constant skill during lengtly times.
21 Jul 08
Originally posted by English TalIs it not possible, indeed probable that higher rated players who cheat then get banned having reached 2200 will slowly depress ratings as they have somehow taken 1000 points permanently out of the system.
Overall site rating won't increase, because RHP is a 'closed' system. (For every plus point, there will be a minus point.)
However... treading very carefully here... the higher rated end of the tables could be skewed by players striving to gain a higher rating by fair means or foul. The lower ranks will be reduced accordingly.
(2200 now no longer shows on page one)
So if we had 1000 players average rating 1200 and banned 20 players of average rating 2200 we have removed 20000 points split between 980 players so haven't we reduced the average rating to just below 1180.
Conversely I suppose players who get banned when at the bottom cause the opposite asdo players who just disappear leaving 100s of games to time out.
21 Jul 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasFair comment.
I'm not sure of this...
When (1) no new members are introduced in the system, and (2) the same number of rating points are exchanged (which not is the case in ratings over 2100) then I agree with you.
But (1) and (2) makes this balance uneven.
To be sure that 1700 rating points is always the same skill, the average rating of all active players sh ...[text shortened]... l then, I don't think 1700 in rating will have the same constant skill during lengtly times.
The site still remains a closed one, however, even though there isn't always a consistent result allowing for higher rateds and provisionals etc etc.
The gradual degradation of rating still remains an issue.
21 Jul 08
Originally posted by English TalYou're quite right, the RHP rating system is closed. Therefore the rating has a life of its own, doesn't obay the rules of the worldwide rating systm of ELO nor national rating system.
Fair comment.
The site still remains a closed one, however, even though there isn't always a consistent result allowing for higher rateds and provisionals etc etc.
The gradual degradation of rating still remains an issue.
21 Jul 08
Originally posted by Dragon FireIt's a closed system, so ultimately it depends on when the 'offended' player chooses to report; naturally this will only be when the player's rating appears to be depressed.
Is it not possible, indeed probable that higher rated players who cheat then get banned having reached 2200 will slowly depress ratings as they have somehow taken 1000 points permanently out of the system.
So if we had 1000 players average rating 1200 and banned 20 players of average rating 2200 we have removed 20000 points split between 980 players s ...[text shortened]... he bottom cause the opposite asdo players who just disappear leaving 100s of games to time out.
We both know what the overall problem is, DF.
You still owe me for the evens bet.
21 Jul 08
Originally posted by English Tali see what you mean.
Overall site rating won't increase, because RHP is a 'closed' system. (For every plus point, there will be a minus point.)
However... treading very carefully here... the higher rated end of the tables could be skewed by players striving to gain a higher rating by fair means or foul. The lower ranks will be reduced accordingly.
(2200 now no longer shows on page one)
21 Jul 08
2 edits
The average ranking in the Player Tables should increase because of the provisional ranking system as well as the 100 day rule. Poorly skilled or motivated provisional players act as "point donors" in that they add points to the system while not being counted. Likewise, because of the 100 day rule, those players who allow themselves to be timed out in their games again donate points to the system and are eventually not counted. So at least on the Player Tables, it is not a zero sum game. The average would probably much closer to 1200 if all the players, past and present, were counted, though several instances of cheaters exclusively playing themselves and creating their own closed systems would probably still skew the average.
Edit: Here's an example: User 285560. Follow this user's games back and you will see that by creating multiple accounts and abusing the provisional rankings system, it's possible to create points from nothing at all.
08 Feb 09
Originally posted by FabianFnasI have been thinking about this issue for a while (almost 6 months 🙂 ), and I now think I have the answer to this question. For it is a phenomenon, overall site rating DOES increase.
You're quite right, the RHP rating system is closed. Therefore the rating has a life of its own, doesn't obay the rules of the worldwide rating systm of ELO nor national rating system.
The RHP rating system is in fact not closed! This factum appeared to me clearly. Because RHP gets new members all the time, 1200 points are put into the rating-pool. And if more players enters RHP, than leaves it, the overall rating will increase. And this is what happens.
Thank you. 😏