| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
psychicwarrior
Fortgeschrittener
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 63
|
 Posted: 06.06.2010 16:57 Post subject: WSC Rankings Link Gone? |
 |
|
I noticed the link for the WSC gone.
How can we access that rating system?
Thx
PW |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
unbiasbob
Alter Hase
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Posts: 604
|
| Posted: 07.06.2010 08:09 Post subject: |
|
|
Hi edie
you can check the WSC on the all-time rankings. It appears that the challenge ranking are the only yearly rankings. Nothing wrong with that I think. You can barrel yourself to the top all-time on wsc. Would that not be a great thrill for you? As for the yearly challenge rankings, it's going to mighty tough to challenge NC and GB but maybe Zach can give that a go with a major winning rampage vs high rankers. For me, I have 1 goal, to surpass you edie in the challenge rankings.
LOL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
psychicwarrior
Fortgeschrittener
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 63
|
| Posted: 07.06.2010 23:31 Post subject: |
|
|
Thx Bob..
Yet I asked about the WSC for 2010 which used to have a link on the rankings page. ANyone know what happened and how to access that ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stratego
Chief-Admin
Joined: 20 May 2003
Posts: 1123
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: 08.06.2010 04:33 Post subject: |
|
|
hi,
we closed the wsc ranking, because we do not want abackdoor for cherry-pickers.
spion posted some time ago, that he will add the ranking again, but does it
really make sence?
by the way: samuel ask why we had 2 ratings in the list - or was it a the barrage list?
this is why wsc in old time could give you a minus score even if you win a game.
so the formula was changed and we had to check which is best.
spion will delete the one which give you to much extra points, just because you play a game,
even if this is weak player. with wsc its more or less just a "laborious task"
maybe dozer is at 1 in wsc and i do not like this backdoor for him.
greets
stratego |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
unbiasbob
Alter Hase
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Posts: 604
|
| Posted: 08.06.2010 08:47 Post subject: |
|
|
| Awesome stratego. That's an extremely good reason for getting rid of that WSC link. I'm sure edie understands. Edie, you used to earn high standings in that WSC with great winning runs but the Dozer's of the world ruined that for ya. No biggy dude. Next year I see you as a top tenner is the challenge ranking so long as you dont play me too often. LOL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
samuel
Alter Hase
Joined: 09 Jan 2007
Posts: 344
Location: United Kingdom
|
| Posted: 08.06.2010 13:59 Post subject: |
|
|
| I would recommend scrapping the WSC barrage list but creating a yearly ranking list because my rating in the klier doesn't move. I won 18 straight and something like 29 out of 30, and I never gained a single point. Because its based on all time rankings, Im still punished for early losses which I no longer pick up at such a rate. So I use wsc as an indicator of how I am doing in the present time, but all you need is a yearly ranking list to show this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stratego
Chief-Admin
Joined: 20 May 2003
Posts: 1123
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: 08.06.2010 15:50 Post subject: |
|
|
hi,
its not that the old games count anymore. they fade away and with every
new months they just count 90%, 80% .... till they are out of the list.
the really old games just count 0,0001%
i really recommend that all should read the documentation from hermann
at his side about the ranking. its not finished, but you find an explanation for
a lot of points.
the link is: http://www.kleier.net/txt/rating_toc.html#SEC_Contents
and here some text from his documentation.
| Quote: |
2.1 Who should understand this? Who understands this?
This paper has been written to give the common player an idea, how rating is done. Therefore
all readers waiting for tremendous formulas will be disappointed. This is, because formulas are luckily nothing more than recipes to prepare ratings from game results. But who understands, how the recipes are created, knows what rating is about.
Step by step each section uncovers another insight: It presents a problem, the concept for the solution and closes with an example to make things clear.
This does not mean that there is no formal mathematical definition of the procedure (See section 5.4 The Formal Description of the Procedure..). If you are keen on a demanding discussion, you are invited to risk a view into it.
If you have any trouble to understand this script, MEISTER ECKHART has some cheering words for you: Wer diese Rede nicht versteht, der mache sich in seinem Herzen keine Sorgen. |
| Quote: |
2.6.1 The Problem of Time Dependence.
If you make a rating you are in a dilemma:
* Game results are very coarse type of data (See section 2.5 Game Results are Coarse Data..). Either one or the other player wins. Draws are rare.
* The strengths of players change with time. This is especially true for young players and for beginners.
In order to get a less noisy and more reliable estimate of the rating, we could accumulate more games for the calculation (See section 2.5.2 How Precise is my Rating?.). But considering the mean value is pointless if the rating changes. Therefore we must find a compromise between the two goals noise suppression and timely correct ratings.
The problem is not caused by a special rating method; it is inherent in the rating itself. |
| Quote: |
2.6.3 Time Dependence in Elo-Rating
Though not stated explicitly, the model of ELO uses static rating with a low pass filter (over the tournament count) to accumulate the results. The filter grows with the rating. The concept is that low rated players are assumed to be scholastic players, which change their rating rapidly.
The ELO-low-pass-filter decays exponentially with the time. This causes the games to devalue very rapidly from the start. |
| Quote: |
2.6.2 Static and Dynamic Rating
Let us look at an example explain the procedures. You sit in a train and want to measure its speed. You have got a wristwatch and there are milestones outside. To make the measurement coarser (just like the rating measurement) the wristwatch has no second hand. Like the players change their strength, the train is accelerating slowly.
There are two concepts:
* Static: Ignore the acceleration. You measure the speed for the first mile. In order to get a finer measurement, you accumulate the time for the first and the second mile. You observe that the second speed is greater. You repeat the step and again the speed increases. In the end you get the mean speed for the whole distance, but you cannot tell, how fast the train was after three miles.
* Dynamic: Do not ignore the acceleration. The next step is to make up a plan, how the speed changes. If the changes are small and if there are no special objections against it, a linear change should be considered. This step is called modeling. If the model is reasonable, you get a good result. If not, the results are questionable. Back to our example: If the train accelerates continously the dynamic model yields the correct speed after three miles and the acceleration.
Studying the above example carefully, shows that a dynamic measurement has a couple of drawbacks: First, you must be sure to have a reasonable model. Second, you have to introduce another system parameter (the acceleration in the example), which makes the measurements more unstable.
Back to rating. Obviously, to observe the change of rating, a player must have played in many tournaments. Therefore dynamic rating can only be applied to players, who have played very often. There is another condition for dynamic rating: If the player has not played since a long time the assumption of a linear change of his rating becomes more and more questionable. Therefore, to be rated dynamically, a player must have played recently.
This divides the players into two groups: One group can be rated dynamically. The other group (the larger one) can only be rated statically. If one player changes from one group to the other, his rating changes abruptly causing the ratings of other players to change too.
In the end, dynamic rating gives a more reasonable estimate of the strength at the expense of more noise. |
| Quote: |
2.6.4 How we do it.
At the time of writing (2000-12), the database contains about 9500 games and the history of busy tournament practice is not older than two or three years. This is not enough for a reliable dynamic rating. Therefore, we still use static rating.
In order to devalue the games more slowly than ELO, we use a function, which mimics the devalue-function of ERIK VAN DEN BERG (Bombbrief 14.). He stated score weights of 1 : 0.8 : 0.55 : 0.3 : 0.05 for scores after zero to four years. A least squares fit of a GAUSSian function yields a time constant of 2.5731 years. |
stratego |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
samuel
Alter Hase
Joined: 09 Jan 2007
Posts: 344
Location: United Kingdom
|
| Posted: 08.06.2010 16:43 Post subject: |
|
|
| Well if old games do not count there must be a problem - how can you win 18 in a row, regardless of opposition level, and not move up even 1 point in the rankings? Especially as after all that, just 1 loss and I lost a point. It seems quite harsh! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stratego
Chief-Admin
Joined: 20 May 2003
Posts: 1123
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: 08.06.2010 19:09 Post subject: |
|
|
hi,
its easy - the expected win was by nearly 100%
because the ranking has a lot of data about you (win and looses) you got something - lets say 0,0000236 points.
this does not touch your position.
this is different if we start the yearly ranking and there is no history. if you then pick the low players and win 30 in a row, the ranking does not know
how good you are.
you are better than xxxx but because you didnt loose some games aginst others there is no limit.
within the classic ranking the same effect isnt shown, (see dozer in the classic ranking)
because there is a history.
see my other posting for fading out the results at our live tourneys, which is the same here.
maybe we must smaller this. (only results within the last 2 years)
stratego |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
