1. The Tao Temple
    Joined
    08 Mar '06
    Moves
    31086
    16 Feb '07 01:36
    Sure to have been suggested many times before. So what's the reason for not calculating the points according to what rating the 2 players were at the START of the game?

    It would protect one player's rating if the other bombs for any reason.
  2. Joined
    14 Aug '06
    Moves
    3534
    16 Feb '07 03:38
    Exactly, some people wait until the other person has won a couple games before giving mate. Holding off the win till the very last hours. I myself have done this but it's a bit of a waste of time. Only did it once.
  3. Joined
    21 Jan '06
    Moves
    18452
    16 Feb '07 04:34
    There was a vote on that subject a while back. It was voted that the ratings at the end of the game are used in the calculations.
  4. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    16 Feb '07 13:01
    http://www.redhotpawn.com/vote/result.php?voteid=7
  5. The Tao Temple
    Joined
    08 Mar '06
    Moves
    31086
    16 Feb '07 13:16
    77 v 33
    A convincing percentage victory but only 110 votes! How well was the vote publicised?
    Can we try it again????

    Sigh! 😳 It doesn't matter. That would be an abuse of democracy wouldn't it?
  6. Standard memberDaemon Sin
    I'm A Mighty Pirateβ„’
    PaTROLLING the forum
    Joined
    01 Dec '04
    Moves
    36332
    16 Feb '07 15:391 edit
    Originally posted by Mixo
    77 v 33
    A convincing percentage victory but only 110 votes! How well was the vote publicised?
    Can we try it again????

    Sigh! 😳 It doesn't matter. That would be an abuse of democracy wouldn't it?
    Considering it was a year and a half ago, I doubt it's still representative of the current subscribers opinions. Look at the number of voters for the polls in '06, the last two have 18 times as many participants.

    EDIT: Maybe a fair solution would be to keep the current counted votes and allow those who haven't yet voted to do so.
  7. Berks.
    Joined
    27 Nov '04
    Moves
    41991
    16 Feb '07 16:381 edit
    Originally posted by Mixo
    Sure to have been suggested many times before. So what's the reason for not calculating the points according to what rating the 2 players were at the START of the game?

    It would protect one player's rating if the other bombs for any reason.
    However, it has the opposite effect if a player starts out with an abnormally low rating then you've got a problem with your suggested method.

    Perhaps the highest of the two could be used?
  8. Standard memberPhlabibit
    Mystic Meg
    tinyurl.com/3sbbwd4
    Joined
    27 Mar '03
    Moves
    17242
    16 Feb '07 17:43
    Here is the next thread when this rule changes:

    Make ratings be calculated at END of game!

    I started a game with a player rated near 1250. Now they are rated 1800 and I had one of my best wins against them. I only got a few points, but should have got many more.

    Please change this rule, we should have a vote!
  9. Standard memberPhlabibit
    Mystic Meg
    tinyurl.com/3sbbwd4
    Joined
    27 Mar '03
    Moves
    17242
    16 Feb '07 17:45
    Originally posted by Peakite
    However, it has the opposite effect if a player starts out with an abnormally low rating then you've got a problem with your suggested method.

    Perhaps the highest of the two could be used?
    Highest of the two? Why? That just inflates ratings.

    P-
  10. Standard memberRamned
    The Rams
    Joined
    04 Sep '06
    Moves
    13491
    16 Feb '07 19:511 edit
    Change the rating system.
    it doesn't matter on how they calculate ratings!! The goal with ratings is not to collect as many points as you possibly can (as engine users think) but to use it as an ***idea*** on your skill level as compared to fellow players on this site. If everyone has the same system, then it is FINE.

    πŸ™„
  11. Standard memberPhlabibit
    Mystic Meg
    tinyurl.com/3sbbwd4
    Joined
    27 Mar '03
    Moves
    17242
    17 Feb '07 15:05
    Originally posted by Ramned
    it doesn't matter on how they calculate ratings!! The goal with ratings is not to collect as many points as you possibly can (as engine users think) but to use it as an ***[b]idea*** on your skill level as compared to fellow players on this site. If everyone has the same system, then it is FINE.

    πŸ™„[/b]
    That's right.

    P-
  12. Subscriberhuckleberryhound
    Devout Agnostic.
    DZ-015
    Joined
    12 Oct '05
    Moves
    41992
    19 Feb '07 05:241 edit
    Originally posted by Phlabibit
    Here is the next thread when this rule changes:

    [b]Make ratings be calculated at END of game!


    I started a game with a player rated near 1250. Now they are rated 1800 and I had one of my best wins against them. I only got a few points, but should have got many more.

    Please change this rule, we should have a vote![/b]
    If a 1250 player has a win against an 1800 player, one or both of the players should be checked for engine use immediately.

    I agree with Mixo's point, but only because of the fact that i've been burned so many times by players being timed out of so many games, then finishing my games......Lastpawnstanding would be a prime culprit of this, and everytime i play him it's in a tournament, so it's not as if i chose to play him....which i wouldn't do.
  13. Joined
    23 Sep '05
    Moves
    11774
    19 Feb '07 05:55
    Originally posted by Mixo
    Sure to have been suggested many times before. So what's the reason for not calculating the points according to what rating the 2 players were at the START of the game?

    It would protect one player's rating if the other bombs for any reason.
    I also don't like it when someone gets timed out in several games, then
    takes a win over me. The rating as it is in the beginning of the game should
    be used to protect from that. The possibility that someone gets timed out in
    several games, then wins and his/her rating just pops right back up because
    the rating at the beginning of the game is used, is not as bad as it is now.
    Now the player who gets timed out a lot pops back halfway, but the other
    player drops to a ridiculously low rating and has to start working his/her way
    back up.
  14. Standard memberXanthosNZ
    Cancerous Bus Crash
    p^2.sin(phi)
    Joined
    06 Sep '04
    Moves
    25076
    19 Feb '07 13:01
    Originally posted by huckleberryhound
    If a 1250 player has a win against an 1800 player, one or both of the players should be checked for engine use immediately.
    Oh really? Because the ELO system itself dictates that a 1250 player will score 0.0404 against an 1800 player (i.e. wins one in 20 / draws one in 10).

    And if you reread Phlab's post he didn't say anything about a 1250 player beating an 1800 player but instead talked of a player having a 1250 rating at the start of the game and an 1800 one at the end of it.
  15. THORNINYOURSIDE
    Joined
    04 Sep '04
    Moves
    245624
    19 Feb '07 13:451 edit
    Originally posted by huckleberryhound
    If a 1250 player has a win against an 1800 player, one or both of the players should be checked for engine use immediately.

    .
    No, no, no.

    It can be done, you can win

    Game 971127

    I am quite sure that neither player involved in that game is an engine user, even though the lower rated player won convincingly πŸ˜‰

    Edit - I think that the ratings at the start of the game should be those used to dictate won points. This I think would stop the large ratings drops - someone dropping from 1800 to 1100 would find it more difficult to get games with 1700+ rated players as they would be losing too many points for a loss. That way they would need to slowly rise back though the ranks only gaining in a few points for their "easy wins" on the way back up to their genuine rating.
Back to Top