Clan Challenges: AVERAGE RATING

I agree with English Tal here, the system is set up for you already, if you need to know the rating history of an opponent, just go look yourself...it does not take that much time or work...I spend more time reading this thread then i do having to check for proper rating match ups. I think the system is pretty fair, and allows for mismatches and for even challenges...a lot of clans dont even look at rating, they just match and play, which is fair, and other clans need match ups that reflect an even avg to play on. Personally ive played almost every player on my clan, I know their abilities...sometimes I dont really use their rating, especially compared to their counterpart if I have played them as well. I know the abilities of both players and I can choose whether it is a fair match up. nonetheless, i like the system, no need to change it! I agree with Tal, the more you allow for strategic matchups the better the challenges are!!

Sounds OK, as long as it's not restrictive (like CalWriter said).

Although I think it really should be up to the leader to check out a players graph if he feels the need.

I think it should have a table as well, though. Say a 1600 player has to leave for some reason, and drops to 1100. His rating shouldn't go below, say, 1550 for challenges. This would save another step as leaders usually have to send out messages explaining their player's rating drop.

And leaders should be able to accept challenges regardless of rating differences if they chose (so no restrictions). Ie big challenges (final fantasy said it first, I think) tend to have rating gaps on both sides.

Could save some time, though, so good idea, overall.

i dont know
current rating does show how youve been playing as of the past few games and i believe that is a testiment to how your playing at that
moment in time as it relates to the challenges.
so i think it is correct how it is now.

gooden out.

Originally posted by ItsYouThatIAdore
...a lot of clans dont even look at rating, they just match and play!!

Well "ItsYouThatIadore", that's exactely one of the points that can be a problem!
Those Clan Leaders work on the principal that the average should be equal and only then they accept..
But look at your own rating.. you've been down to around 1600.. matching you with somebody who's rating is normally around 1600 looks like a fair thing purely based on current rating, but.......

The same is when I have a player who's average level is around 1600, currently peaking at 1630, and I try to match him to somebody who's currently rated at 1550, but has an average level of 1600 too.. on paper it looks like an uneven thing (1630-1550) but in practice they would be a fair match..

And I've seen it soooo many times that Leaders continue to bounce saying that it is unfair because of the huge (CURRENT) rating difference.. now THAT's what I wanna get rid of.. either by using some sort of historical average / using tournament entry rating.. or just getting rid of any average, forcing the leaders to look into the challenge with more care..

The idea is good, mainly because it reflects a longer term evolution of the players involved in the challenge and thus it offers a more realistic overview on the oponnents.

I agree in some sense, but I still like the idea of a clan duty to check out names and match ups, and try to work things respectively in your favor...its the whole point of the system, or so i believe anyhow. I agree it could useful for players who are timedout and it shows them as a higher rated player...other than that, i dont see how it would improve the system??

I do see what your saying though, im not just trying to be a part of the problem. However, if we can still find away to change the system and provide a way to keep the strategic part together, than id be more willing to change the system.

I'm a new leader, and the system is working okay for me. I do like the idea of having both scores right there though.
Also I like the idea of being able to send messages with challenges.

Originally posted by English Tal
I understand your idea... but it does remove from the clan leader a few strategical possibilities.
Personally, I think that it is the job of the Leader to ascertain whether a challenge is either 'proper' or 'naughty'.
I prefer the idea of a 'clever' leader being able to promote his clan better than a leader who simply clicks accept or decline. Think about it.

I'm with you on this one, it removes any advantage that a dedicated clan leader that is willing to do a bit more research may have.

With the tournament rating plan, it makes lazy clan leaders more competitive, leaving the more dedicated guys with a 'disadvantage,'
so to speak.

For me personally, it will remove most of the fun out of the whole challenge procedure...

My vote is a definite 'NO!'

Have a rec from me 🙂

My one minor point -

Taking this purely from my own experience - as I understand it the tournament rating is based on the highest point over a long term (or close to it at least.)

The thing is, my game can go up and down. My rating can drop a couple hundred points in a matter of two months. Note I said two MONTHS not two days as I don't tank for the sake of easy tournaments.

I would prefer seeing both tournament and current rating to see where a player is today compared to "historical performance."

But then again I don't know how much extra work that is for Russ. If it's just adding an extra field to the dynamic dropdown, that would be nice, but if it's a lot of extra work for him I would not push for it hard.

Not sure I'm making a ton of sense here but that is my perspective, given that when I'm in a slump (and they last long periods of time), I'd prefer to play against players whose skill sets match my slump period, rather than have to compete against my greatest period of play.

I don't have a problem with the proposal, but I do agree with English Tal too.
Speaking personally, I don't often use the average rating calculator on the challenge page much as I always check individuals ratings and compare past history before issuing or accepting challenges anyway. So, whether that calculator shows average of current rating or average of the tournament rating, I don't mind.

However, I suppose that it could be a useful statistic at the bottom of the page but as with all statistics it's meaning could easily subject to a difference of opinion and so in the long term, the best way to ensure that the clan is getting the fairest (or favourable) pairings is to do what the clan leader is supposed to do - lead the clan, research the challenges and make the decisions....

Originally posted by stammer
Taking this purely from my own experience - as I understand it the tournament rating is based on the highest point over a long term (or close to it at least.)

Tournament rating has a floor to the rating of 100 points below your highest in the last 100 days and so there is a limit to how low it will go even if your rating fluctuations are entirely sandbag-free.

However, I agree with your (and others) statement that having both ratings present on the clan challenge page would be useful.

Current ratings are useful in setting up matches, but an average rating would be more very helpful.

As long as we are on the subject, shouldn't we be getting team statistics from redhot, like matches won, lost and drawn and winning percentage? These should be posted as well.

Eric from Caro-Kann Club

i think it is okay the way it is it is the clan leaders resposibilty to make sure the players are evenly matched

i like the idea, i always try to look at past performance in challenges, this is very tedious, and time consuming, but it can help alot in picking your poison............again, i like the idea