Jump to content


Photo

Obsolete Questions


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
24 replies to this topic

#21 scottrussia

scottrussia

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 719 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze General

Posted 08 June 2016 - 09:35 AM

ON this I would have to disagree with Prof.  This site uses ELO ratings and that's what should be used if we are going to simply use a rating for seeding.

 

We already struggle to get more people involved in tournaments and using something that none of them will be aware of is likely to discourage new participation.


​Spartan Warriors

KING of the Battlefield!!!!!!


#22 TheOptician

TheOptician

    General

  • Tournament Manager
  • 2,233 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 08 June 2016 - 01:41 PM

Scott,

I think it's worth pointing out what the Kleier ranking actually is - it is a ranking that only uses tournament results between matches in either TC tournaments or WCO! It's actually a more relevant ranking than ELO in that only tournament results are considered - with all matches that count towards the ranking being played on this site.

So the argument that it is an external ranking doesn't really hold any sway for me. If you were part of a panel that was to come up with a seeding system - you would no doubt include tournament results in your calculations. And you would end up with something that closely resembles the Kleier ranking!
  • KARAISKAKIS likes this

#23 TheOptician

TheOptician

    General

  • Tournament Manager
  • 2,233 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 08 June 2016 - 05:58 PM

There are also limitations to the Kleier system as follows:

1. Some players who have played a very small amount of games are more likely to have a ranking not representative of their ability purely due to the sample size (the solution is to have a minimum number of games required to use a players Kleier ranking)

2. Also due to the small sample size, some players may have a Kleier ranking not representative of their ability because they had one or two bad tournaments. It only takes a good streak to achieve a high Max ELO (because this ranking is more susceptible to short-term movements).

Combining the rankings using the method of conversion suggested by the Prof entirely removes the drawbacks of each respective system. And if you look at the result that the seeding provides, I think it makes it difficult to argue against the outcome. I'll post it here later:

#24 scottrussia

scottrussia

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 719 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze General

Posted 09 June 2016 - 04:58 AM

Hi Opt,

I'm not questioning the mathematical superiority of any one system.  All I'm pointing out is that players that come to the site and play have an ELO rating.  If they haven't yet participated in tournaments its all they know.  By using something else that only counts tournaments is a likely deterrent to getting new people to participate.

 

One other technical point I'd make is that I believe that this system counts the WCO - a tournament that requires the use of skype and not part of the TC's schedule of tournaments for the year.  This theoretically allows people to not play ranked games on the site - not participate in tournaments - and to be rewarded for performance in the WCO - which uses a format not in play here.

 

None of which I really care about - As I've previously stated the TC can seed folks however they would like - we are all included and if you win your matches your the champ.  But I do believe that to encourage new people to participate we should use the ratings that they know.

 

Regards,

Scott


​Spartan Warriors

KING of the Battlefield!!!!!!


#25 TheOptician

TheOptician

    General

  • Tournament Manager
  • 2,233 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 09 June 2016 - 08:57 AM

Scott,

Your main point is that you would consider the contribution of Kleier rating a deterrent to new players. I completely refute this. A reference to exactly how the seeding system works would likely be included in some sub-section of the rules which (let's face it) many existing participants would likely not take the time to fully read, let alone new players.

Incorporating Kleier into the rankings would have a far smaller impact than you imagine. Id also like to confirm at this stage that talk of incorporating Kleier is purely hypothetical at this stage and actually got defeated in a TC vote earlier this year.

It would however solve two main problems with using MaxELO alone:

1. Players with a Max ELO well below their true ability would get a more accurate seeding (eg playa1). As Prof pointed out, having strong players seeded low distorts certain groups and actually ends up conflicting with one of the main principles of a seeded tournament - that quality of players is dispersed as equally as possible throughout (so we don't end up with Hielco, playa and Losermaker in the same group). This is not so much for the benefit of those players, but for the other unfortunate players drawn in the group of death who may rightly ask why the seeding system has failed them.


2. The same impact occurs when new tournament players of a high standard (but undeveloped ELO) join. If Garulfo for example were to play, a seeding panel with any sense would use the other available information on his ability - or else the group of death mentioned above just got more deathy.

I believe that a more accurate seeding system makes for a better tournament for all. It doesn't matter so much who is number 12 and number 13, but it does matter if a player who should be top 8 is in fact only top 35.

As for the use of Skype in WCO, this is not TCs domain, so I can't confirm exactly what is required to participate in WCO - but I will say that simply having Skype and entering the WCO does not confer any advantage whatsoever to your Kleier score. The proposal to incorporate Kleier as a method of seeding would only improve the position of a small number of players (those who have a Kleier rating that is significantly better than their Max ELO). For the most part it would have very little impact.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users