Big difference (Kleier vs WSC)

[-deleted129]

Hello,

I never though the difference would be this big between the WSC and Kleier Ranking.

Examples are
MSP 17th - 91st
gpet0 3rd - 23rd
General_E 42nd - 4th
JvG 60th - 19th


I am not saying Kleiers Ranking is not suitable for Gravon but I think its possible to play 20-30 ranked games to low ranked players (win all) and be #1 on the Ranking with 2100 points.

DerMeister stopped playing in 2003 because he gained one or zero points for a win and lost 10 or more when he lost.... Because he had 200+ games.
And players with less then 30 games could gain 50 or more points when winning a game..

Comments?

Wussy
_________________
S t r a t e g o - C l u b - N a p o l e o n

[jerry]

Yeah...

No wonder games can become Selective..

Jerry.

[MSP]

Ow to bad, I dont play always serious. I'm 17 now on WSC rating lol.
I dont care anymore, without time limit its very very boring to play here...

[cosmo]

same applies to wsc rating anyone could for example get a friend to join gravon and beat them 25-30 times and get to #1 seeing as new players begin on 1400 with wsc rating so points can be gained very quickly gaining 25 points then 50 then 73 etc etc its been done before at wsc so im sure it will happen again

cos

[spion]

Hi players.

The first thing i do want to comment is the argument that a player just has to get #1 and stay there forever.

Perhaps some of you already noticed, that Lion is not #1 ranked player any longer. Thats because i implemented an old but yet unrealized rule:
If you did not play at least 3 games in the last 60 days, you will not get a rank any longer.

(This does not apply to the WSC ranking yet.)

Comment on Wussys posting:
It is not possible to just play 20-30 games against some low rated players to get #1 in Kleiers system. But it would be in the WSC system.

Currently we are taking much efford to compare the WSC rating to Kleiers rating.

There is one thing i can not mention often enough:

Kleiers rating shows the playing stength of a player. The playing strength in fact does not change from day to day but only within decades!!
If someone played 100+ games, his rating has become very accurate and shows his real playing strength. This value will only change very slowly if at all because the playing strength of a player does the same. Thats life..

best regards
spion

[Agresor]

Hi
i do not say that WSC is much better solution,but Kleier system is hopeless and executive staff here wont admit this fact,so I think it is NOT make sense to play here for points,just for fun!

hope for better times
Agresor

[cosmo]

isnt it fun playing for points then ?????????? cuz thats impression you are giving .
back in the days of the wsc i played only 100 in total BUT 90% i played against players in top 10 therefore losing a fair few games leaving me ranked between 6 and 8 for the entire time the club lived and fact is i didnt care in the slightest about trying to reach #1 if i did id have played newbies over and over BUT i chose to play games that very a challenge instead THUS only once ever reaching top 4 but whenever i played the games were FUN thats right FUN so way i see it is what does it matter which ranking system is used as long as you enjoy the game losing 25 points one game gaining only 5 another doesnt come into it its way all ratings are worked so as spion says thats life

[Guest]

[the_freak]

that last post was from me and i think i misreaded you a bit......
But i still don't really see your point.......I mean if you think kleiers system -........this page offers the wsc system too so that must satisfy you then......2 ratings........so enough to choose from anyway :p

[legolas]

Hi everybody,

I like ranking-systems very much. It is the motivation for my game. But I don't know much about Kleier and nothing about WSC. Are this ratings only for gravon / stratego or Standard-Ratings for much things?

The idea of Kleier is good, that the ranking is not a table of points for wins and losses but a ranking of a strength for a player. It would be no good, if a guy how plays very often became to many points. But I think it's also not good, that I only became 7 points for a win in such a constellation:
Me: Rank: 121 - 91 games - 1310 points, Opponent Rank: 46 - 1513 points
Often the first games of a player at gravon are lost, because of the new situation to play stratego at the pc, without pratice against good players. After 30 or more games a player gets his real "profile". Look at my rating and you will understand. What I want to say is, don't appraise the first games to much and give more points also after 100 games.

Maybe it's also written in this topic, but can somebody explian in a few words how the two rating-systems are working and what the big differences are?

Thx
Legolas

[spion]

Hi Legolas.

1. Kleiers rating is used for the ISF world rating/ranking list in real life Statego tourneys. Look at [url="http://kleier.net"]Kleiers Website[/url].
(ISF = International Stratego Foundation).

The WSC system is a simplified FIDE system. FIDE is used to rate chess players in real life games. The WSC system itself was used by the WorldStrategoClub (which does not exist any longer) and now is used here, but nowhere else.

2. Effectivly the WSC system considers only the last 30 or 40 games to make the rating of a player. This is a problem, because a player may have had bad luck in his latest games or he may just have choosen stronger opponents and so lost often. On the other hand a player may have had good luck or just only played weak opponents and so gets a rating which is too high (good examples are NotoriousSmaug and MSP).

Both systems have one thing in common:

If you loose against a weaker opponent, your rating will decrease. If you win against a stronger opponent, your rating will increase.

If you loose against a stronger opponent, your rating will nearly not be affected.

Now a difference:
If you win against a weaker opponent, your Kleier rating wont be affected much, but the WSC rating gives at least 2 points to you.

While the WSC rating "considers" only the last 30 to 40 games, Kleiers system always takes all results into account to calculate the rating.

The consequence is, that your Kleier rating will stabilize after you played a few houndred games. A loss or a win will not change your rating much. Thats because Kleiers rating reflects your playing strength. And your playing strength is not based on single games results but on all results taken together.

Kleiers system also "forgets" games in the very past, but by using a time constant and not by forgetting all but the last 30-40 games.

Best regards
spion

[legolas]

Hi Spion,

thank you for your answer. You spend a lot of time in gravon and gravon is fantastic!

I think a mixture of Kleier and WSC would be the best solution. Kleier should appraise the last games more than the first games and WSC should not only appraise the last games. The sense of a ranking is to show the strenght of a player. And more important are the latest results. But all games should be valued to show the avereage stenght too.

Regards
Legolas

[tableplay]

Hi Spion, is the time constant (smoothing constant/weighting constant) something that is fixed in the Kleier System or is it an adjustable parameter ? Perhaps adjusting the weighting constant so slightly more emphasis is given to more recent games than it currently gives might afford the best solution based on the user comments I've read. Or in other words it's great to measure player strength, but you don't want to go overboard and weight past games too heavily.

Alternatively you could even have a smoothing contant that is a function of rank:
Assume higher ranked players are very experienced and so they have a higher smoothing constant (more emphasis on history), and conversely lower ranked players have a lower smoothing constant (more emphasis on recent games). An adaptive smoothing constant if you will (I'm guessing that this system incorporates 1st order smoothing).

Cheers, Tableplay