The top 4 cherry pickers in the top 20

gentleben · Fortgeschrittener Joined: 02 Sep 2006 Posts: 103

To get in the top 20 you have to be a good player, no doubt. But, for those who pick and choose who they play to make themselves look better in the rankings, to me, it would be a hollow victory to think I made it in the top 20 by deliberately playing lower ranked players.

Since 33% of the ranked players are ranked 1500 or above, anyone playing significantly less than that is obviously cherry picking. And it is also noticeable in their winning %.

So, to give them the recognition they are looking for, here are the top 4 cherry pickers in the top 20.

1. tomba 14%
2. Holunder 14.4%
3. psychonaut 16%
4. Dozer 16%

To be fair, I have been beaten by all of them except Holunder but we have only played 3 times, so again, I am not saying any of these are bad players. It just bugs me to see someone cherry pick lower ranked players to make their ranking look higher.

acerimmer · Posted: 14.01.2010 00:19 Post subject:

Well I am currently on 32.84% of my games being against 1500+ players.

esquire · Posted: 28.01.2010 04:37 Post subject:

how u figure that out? whats mine

acerimmer · Posted: 28.01.2010 04:55 Post subject:

Esquire:
The games talked about are 2009 ranked games.
You are at a very high 44%
How you work it out=
Number of games played against 1500+ opponents divided by your total games.
Yours is 11/25 = 0.44 (which is 44%)

gentleben · Fortgeschrittener Joined: 02 Sep 2006 Posts: 103

Hey Ace, how do you look back at previous years rankings?

And by the way Esquire, you should not worry about being accused of cherry picking. I just wish you played more games.

acerimmer · Posted: 28.01.2010 19:41 Post subject:

The older rankings have disappeared (but none of the data is lost......everything is still there)
The ones still available are 2007/2008/2009 & 2010.
2007 = http://www.gravon.de/gravon/stratego/rating2007.jsp?select=wsc&order=
2008 = http://www.gravon.de/gravon/stratego/rating2008.jsp
2009 = http://www.gravon.de/gravon/stratego/rating2009.jsp

I have asked spion for the full data from 2003 onwards.......so I can create a Full History of yearly ranking tables with Top 10 players going onto a Gravon Roll of Honour list.

nochance · Posted: 29.01.2010 15:38 Post subject: the real cherry-pickers

also 2005 is available

http://www.gravon.de/gravon/stratego/rating2005.jsp

@ cherry-picking: im not sure, if cherry-picking really gives you a high ranking. A few losts against low ranked players should be enough to crash down with your ranking.
The only problem is, when they played not enough games, yet.

Im very afraid of low-ranked (and aggressive) players: a win will give me nothing, but i have much to lose.
For my ranking i like most to play against opponents, who are around 100-150 points lower-ranked than me.

The really cherry-pickers 2009 are AceRimmer and myself. We only played against lower-ranked-players

_________________
DontMissTheChance

acerimmer · Posted: 29.01.2010 18:15 Post subject:

Hi NC.
Thx for the link to the 2005 ranking.

If you find 2003, 2004 or 2006 let me know.

As for playing players only within 150 max of your ranking........that would mean i would hardly be able to play anyone.

There were only 8 other players within 150 points of my ranking in 2009.......and in 2010 there is only 3 other players at the moment within 150 points.
Rather than choose opponents because of their ranking.......I just tend to play players who are on around the time of day I usually play games on Gravon.

gentleben · Fortgeschrittener Joined: 02 Sep 2006 Posts: 103

Cherry picking can boost a rating. Dozer is a case on point. He is currently sitting at 3rd with a very high winning % but he has only played one player above 1500 and that was mohre at 1516. You are right about one thing NoChance. He is under a lot of pressure because one loss and his ranking will come crashing down like a house of cards.

But you are wrong about something else. Only Ace can say he played lower ranked players. If you played him then you played at least one player above you.

It is nice to truly be sitting at the top, unlike Dozer. And where have you been NC? We need to see you more on the gamefield.

acerimmer · Posted: 03.02.2010 15:51 Post subject:

mohre is currently on 1470.......so Dozer has not played any players above 1500 this year.

I bet that guy is bored stiff......lol
I mean......he has been on most days WAITING for low players to join his games.
The other day he was that bored he even took on a 1300 player which was maybe more because he was bored, rather than out of choice.
I have joined his game 3 or 4 times this year and on each occasion he NEVER started the game.

His current player opponent is 1000, 1100 & 1200 players.........a bit like that Falke fellow on the all time list.

acerimmer · Posted: 05.02.2010 17:23 Post subject:

It seems like the Kleier ranking may have a flaw after all?

Although this is not relevant to real life games which are played with Swiss Perfect......(where if you win a game you have to play against a stronger opponent.....thus you cannot avoid the best players) I do think in this online environment where a small percentage of players avoid competition to bolster their rankings.........this has created a slightly less accurate ranking.

The current Kleier system is perfect for real life rankings.......but maybe a few adjustments could be made to the rankings to make the ranking system more accurate in the online environment where some players pick and choose their opponents?

There would be 2 alterations which I would like to see applied to the ONLINE kleier rankings.

1. A change to the time diminishing system which sees old games relevance reduced as time progresses. I would like to see this only implemented above a minimum amount of games. (either 25, 50 or 100 games and then the normal rules of kleier takes effect........but until this minimum number is met......then all games count at 100%)

2. A capped rank for players playing an excessive amount of low players.
Maybe a maximum of 300 points of their 10th highest game opponents.
An example would be......someone plays 100 games......ranked in order of highest to lowest......the 10th highest player out of those opponents is at 1500 points.......which means the highest possible score they could achieve would be 1800. If the 10th highest score was 1600 then the highest score before capping would be 1900.

In Dozers current situation.......this would give him a cap of:
1670

26 games played:
10% rounded up = 3rd highest game opponent = the cap (+300)
His 3rd highest game was: chief at 1370
Therefore he would have a cap of 1670 regardless of how many 1000, 1100 and 1200 players he beat.

count_floyd · Newbie Joined: 22 Jun 2003 Posts: 9

[Then I must be at least 60% cause I play only players ranked higher than me(which explains why my record -)

psychicwarrior · Fortgeschrittener Joined: 03 Nov 2004 Posts: 63

Yes the Reality is people like Ace have a very limited selection of people to play and often the players with the highest rankings, player fewer games . It just how Kleier works.

Ace has never ducked me, despite his setup times that can be measured with the Mayan calendar

, he, unlike , many top 20 players, doesn't duck and avoid for fear of losing.

unbiasbob · Alter Hase Joined: 21 Jun 2005 Posts: 604

I'm in favor of a new link naming the top cherry pickers. lol. how about it?

unbiasbob · Alter Hase Joined: 21 Jun 2005 Posts: 604

I want a year end top 5 cherry picker list. Better yet, how about a to 10 out of the top 25 just to keep numbers round.