Cleaning up the rankings

[acerimmer]

This idea is firmly aimed at the "overall" kleier all player rankings. (but it could also be used and implemented on the "overall" wsc rankings)

This is just a suggestion, but I think it would be useful.

Maybe show all "dead" accounts in a different colour (Black would be appropiate.....as the accounts are dead).

What are dead accounts?
Dead accounts are accounts that cannot be used again.........these are typically alias accounts and banned members accounts.

Why should alias accounts be left in?
Either remove them........or change them to another colour. This way the rankings will be more accurate.
I suggest all "dead" accounts be turned to black tex....including the figures showing win/loss etc etc.

I also would like to suggest that there be a limit on the amount of time an account can lay dormant. I am not saying erase any accounts.......but for example............maybe turn any player who has not played 3 ranked games in a given 2 year period.......black. You could even differenciate between dormant accounts and "dead" accounts. For example: a dormant account can merely have the name in black tex......while a dead account could be ENTIRELY in black tex....even the win/loss info.

What do you think?

I don't think it would be difficult to implement and it would certainly be useful to know which accounts are dead and which are dormant. It would also allow players to more accurately predict their rankings.

It may even encourage a few old players to play a few games again. Anyone who can't play 3 ranked games in 2 years, doesn't deserve to be in the rankings. Everyone can manage 3 games in 2 years.

Good idea or bad?

[ricardo90]

good idea, i was thinging about this already for a long time
_________________
OWNAGE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[sadistic]

Ace, you are too kind. Remove those accounts altogether and make the regulations more strict as to whom is rated. Rated players should be required to play at least 10 games per month. Posers and deadbeats need to be removed. The real players are the ones who are on this site, day in and day out. Without them, this site wouldn't survive.

[acerimmer]

As much as I agree with you about removing dead accounts......I don't think it is possible. The reason being that the calculations are taken from all results including past ones too. Removing the results of these accounts would technically erase games off some players rankings. For this reason......they would need to be incorporated into the rankings. What I suggested would leave the results in BUT would take away the visible presence of the players. They would be blackened, so as to show a dead account. Another alternative......could be to place all black/dead accounts right at the bottom of the rankings.

The dormant account problem......is another problem. Yes the dormant account holders should be removed, BUT making the rules less strict would be better than the current practice of having "no time limit" on accounts.
Better to have a limit which is very leaniant......than have no limit at all.

Sometimes change is a slow process.

[unbiasbob]

I think sadistic's idea would be good for the Kleier system and Ace's good for the WSC system

[sadistic]

Everybody here, except the administration, believes that Kleier should be dumped altogether.

[ricardo90]

or we can start all over again, everybody by 0 ? then we can play for real again, some players just don't raise so fast anymore, i am one of them. but i think this would be good also.

no more dead accounts, and we all can start over again with 0 points and fight for the 1st place
_________________
OWNAGE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[lightwing]

I don't know how the rankings are calculated, but starting with 0 means (mostly) Something*0, Better start with 500 or so.

[ricardo90]

yes ok, but what i meant, is that we start from the beginning, not 0 points but indeed 500 or something for everyone, but you know what i mean
_________________
OWNAGE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[acerimmer]

rico:

We started from a fresh on 01/01/07. Only 3 months ago!
That is why the overall rankings will never be reset.......because we already have a current ranking system which shows the rankings of players NOW!

This is why most people believe (as i do) that the 2007 ranking is more accurate than the overall ranking system. Currently the 2007 ranking is showing the rankings from ALL matches in the last 3 months.......which gives a fairly good indicator of how good each player is AT THE MOMENT.

What I propose is just to eliminate all the dead accounts and dormant accounts from the overall ranking system.....this would actually make the overall system a bit better.

Take this example: I look on the overall kleier rankings.......and I see 32 players above me.
16 (exactly half) of these guys havent even played any where near 100 games.
8 (exactly 25%) of these players have played less than 23 games.
There is an additional % of alias/dead accounts within these 32 players. I count at least 3 alias accounts above me........but probably many more which I do not know about.
Most of these 32 players have not even played for over 2 years.
15 players in this list of 32 have either not even played 1 game in the last 2 years OR they are dead accounts.
If you count which players have played more than 3 games in the last 2 years (within this 32 player list) then more than half would fall into this catorgorie.
OK some of these players on this list......should play more.....and their reputation says they should be within the rankings. (I am thinking of Lion and General E) But on the other hand........playing 3 games (every 2 years) should not be a problem for these people.
Some of the other accounts in this list of 32..........are these players real or bogus? A player plays a few games and then disapears forever?
My example is Vauban. He has played a total of 9 games and was last seen on Gravon in November 2004. I am pretty sure (unless he is a top real life player) that he would be back for more games. He hasn't been back! This makes me think...........is he an alias who got busted?
Certainly I think something needs to change within the overall rankings. It is so far of the mark.......it really devalues the rankings.
I would love the opportunity to play all these players who sit so high and don't ever play.
The only player (out of these players who play so little) that I have played ......is Lion. I played him 2 games at meta. He is a very nice guy........I just wish he would play more online. I had the honour to captain the European Team and he was one of the Euro stars that helped win the Trophy for Europe. A very good player.
All the rest......I have never played........before my time. Nearly half played their last game......before I even joined Gravon.

[ricardo90]

but i mean, totally.

2007 and the ranking of total games
_________________
OWNAGE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[acerimmer]

but if overall was reset......then it would be identical to 2007?

Also......it could no longer be called " the overall kleier ranking ".

If it was removed or reset.......then noone would have a record of games from before the date it was reset?

What would you like to call this new ranking system rico?
Maybe we could call it the "New overall ranking system from when ricardo figured out how to play"?

Each ranking system must be based on firm principles.......not merely a system to please one player.

As a record of a players total play record on gravon............this is a useful tool. This however......is not an accurate way to decide a players CURRENT strength.
For this reason the 2007 is the best indicator (2006 kleier being the 2nd best indicator.....as we are only in march2007)

What we could do to improve the system......is merely remove dead accounts and dormant ones.

[ricardo90]

but i'm not the only onewho think about this more players are complaining they don't raise that much anymore and this give new comers even good the chance to be higher in the ranking, no one can pass lion ( all players ) and playa1 @ the whole list because the high ranked people don't raise enough anymore, because the played to much :S
_________________
OWNAGE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[OGETARTS]

Interesting thoughts, Ace. I will bring this up to spion and get his perspective on the idea. Thanks for posting.

I think every ranking/rating system is going to have its pros and cons. I am certainly open to using something different. Kleier is nice at measuring the strength of a player, but it does have some negatives. Does anyone have a ranking system they would like to suggest?


OGE

[acerimmer]

Hi Ogy

Don't get me wrong.....I think the kleier system is the dogs boll**ks of ranking systems.
It is certainly the best system!

The system does however lose something over time.....but this is not very apparent for a yearly ranking, unless you suffer from E.S.S. (Excessive Stratego Syndrome)

It is ideally suited to a yearly system.

The overall record is not as accurate for this reason. I am not asking to change the overall rankings......but I think the idea of removing dead and dormant accounts OR merely changing these accounts to a different colour would help players see where they stand in an all-time list. For this reason the old guys would need to play 3 games every 2 years......otherwise the account would become dormant and be less prominant within the kleier all player list.