Jump to content


Photo

Are the top five the best five?


  • Please log in to reply
175 replies to this topic

#21 maxroelofs

maxroelofs

    Major

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,160 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 18 March 2016 - 02:38 PM

If we compare with Gravon, best not to forget Losermaker (up there on Gravon + the last tourneywinner over here).

 

 

You can be mentioned as well. ;)


To watch stratego videos: https://www.youtube....HOHXWONQMsVcOLA

#22 iron_maiden

iron_maiden

    Miner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 212 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Sergeant

Posted 18 March 2016 - 11:53 PM

Tonight as I write this I'm at 626 and you're at 627, iron_maiden.


Gary I was at 773 when you wrote that and am now 763, what are you talking about?

#23 Moriarty

Moriarty

    Major

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,178 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 19 March 2016 - 12:02 AM

Tonight as I write this I'm at 626 and you're at 627, iron_maiden.


Gary I was at 773 when you wrote that and am now 763, what are you talking about?

yous hould sign out and sign back in


I have no idea what that thing under my avatar is. I've always liked stickers

#24 iron_maiden

iron_maiden

    Miner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 212 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Sergeant

Posted 19 March 2016 - 02:06 AM

It threw me out randomly earlier and I did have to sign back in - still on 763...

#25 --Wogomite--

--Wogomite--

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 578 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 24 May 2016 - 10:10 PM

Texaspete has predicted 4 of 5 of the top players correctly in an earlier post. Recently this has come to be true.  Great prediction Pete!!



#26 Witherguy12

Witherguy12

    Bomb

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 66 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Colonel

Posted 24 May 2016 - 11:32 PM

I think everyone generally is good. :) (At least most people I play) (The "losers" I'm talking about are none of you people). :)



#27 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,507 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Colonel

Posted 25 May 2016 - 01:34 PM

Tonight as I write this I'm at 626 and you're at 627, iron_maiden.

Gary I was at 773 when you wrote that and am now 763, what are you talking about?


Wow, I just read this above. A little late. Yes, apparently it was a sign in/sign out thing in the forum.

But I didn't see your comment, iron_maiden because you didn't quote it correctly. So I received no notification. I wasn't ignoring you. It should have appeared like this:




Tonight as I write this I'm at 626 and you're at 627, iron_maiden.


Gary I was at 773 when you wrote that and am now 763, what are you talking about?

Then I would have received the notification. :)

By the way I'm glad you're so far advanced into the platinum ranks in reality. It means there's hope for me, one who at one point erroneously thought he was about equal with you! :D

i77rs4m.jpg

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...931#entry468931


#28 --Wogomite--

--Wogomite--

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 578 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 25 May 2016 - 02:52 PM

I think everyone generally is good. :) (At least most people I play) (The "losers" I'm talking about are none of you people). :)

 

I am sure many people appreciate your comment, I also agree with your point that most are generally good. I will have to say though that there seems to be a handful of players that consistently beat even "really good" players. A top and rare group of people that have found something not many have. Whether it just be insane patience, a 30 move advance superior spacial awareness, risk reward being maintained with constant maximum pressure, a combination of the bunch and more, some have learned to do it almost never deviating from the next best move game after game after game. I am not saying their skill level is mystical or unlearn-able to the average mind or that "really good" players can't play competitively with them. What I am saying, is that phenomenal consistency only resides with a handful of people. Just as Michael Jordan was to the "NBA", Babe Ruth was to the MLB, Messi is for la "League", and Barry Sanders was to the "NFL", I believe we have a rare amount of players just as good in the realm of Stratego.

 

I ultimately wanted peoples opinion whether Stratego.coms ELO have captured these players accurately? Does "Nick, Fleur, and Napoleons Clean Ranking" capture this more accurately? Are Tournament Ranking Points proof in the pudding or would some look at live tournaments and weigh in their opinions with those? Is it a combination of all of them all or none outright? 

 

No one voted in the "superstars" that I mentioned above. They flat out proved themselves! Therefor in what way can the strongest proof of these Stratego Champions also be observed?

 

I have tried to keep an updated current top five of Stratego.com ELO, I may add other sources soon.

 

 

                                                          Stratego.com ELO

1. Hielco

2. SEKERTZISS

3. Sohal

4. Nortrom

5. Laughing

 

                                 Nick, Fleur, and Napoleon's Clean Ranking

 

1. Hielco

2. SEKERTZISS

3. Nortrom

4. Sohal

5. Manning2Cruz

 

 

                                             (TRP) Masters Results

 

1. Hielco

2. Playa1

3. Nortrom

4. Enigma

5. Spyros77

 

 

                                      (WCO) 1st World online Championship

 

1. Morx

2. Nortrom

3. Hielco

4. SEKERTZISS

5. Garulfo

                                  

I don't use gravon. If anyone is willing to give me the top five of it or others you may know about Ill add them too.            


  • Master Mind likes this

#29 --Wogomite--

--Wogomite--

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 578 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 26 May 2016 - 03:00 AM

I just want to point out that according to my list, Nortrom and Hielco are the only two equally consistent with appearances.

SEKERTZISS has the next for appearances and then Sohal, with no other player appearing more then once in these four leaderboards.



#30 Losermaker

Losermaker

    Major

  • Moderators
  • 1,017 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 27 May 2016 - 12:27 PM

I don't think that stratego.com's rating is accurate for all players. Yes Hielco is top, and he is always going to be no matter what system is used. But I think that the ELO requires one to have played/play a lot of games (if you have a 75 win % you are going to keep moving upward the more you play, even if it is slowly). The one exception being amazing win % and playing few games. 

 

At metaforge we used Krach, which was based off win % against what level of opponents in comparison to you, and personally it is my favourite system. gravon uses something similar I think, and I like its system next best, not because I am able to be ranked higher on there, but I don't have to dedicate all my free time playing to get higher. I have just about given up on the ranks here, not because I cant get higher, I know I could reach 1000 at least if I was playing more, but I simply cant.

 

So as I see it, with the current system in place, your top players are going to be: players with amazing win %, and the players who play a lot with a win %75+. oh and I forgot to mention cheaters :P

 

For me I like to be able to play a game here and there, and be at my true level without having to devote my whole life to it.

Laters,

Losermaker


  • The Maestro and cflag like this

#31 --Wogomite--

--Wogomite--

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 578 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 27 May 2016 - 01:15 PM


At metaforge we used Krach, which was based off win % against what level of opponents in comparison to you, and personally it is my favourite system. gravon uses something similar I think, and I like its system next best, not because I am able to be ranked higher on there, but I don't have to dedicate all my free time playing to get higher. I have just about given up on the ranks here, not because I cant get higher, I know I could reach 1000 at least if I was playing more, but I simply cant.

 

 

I would love to get a top five players from metaforge if you are willing to right them down for me with their scores.



#32 The Prof

The Prof

    Colonel

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,518 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Scout

Posted 27 May 2016 - 07:56 PM

I would love to get a top five players from metaforge if you are willing to right them down for me with their scores.

 

Unfortunately, the Metaforge site seems to finally have gone dark.  It's really too bad because it held a sortable database of all game results and daily rankings lists going back about 10 years.  Until recently I was able to access it , but now I fear all this information is lost forever.

 

I agree with Losermaker that KRACH is the most accurate ranking system.  We used it to seed 64-player tournaments at Metaforge and over several years and it was uncanny in its ability to predict the percent of upsets that would occur in tournament matches.  Its drawback is that it requires a tremendous amount of computing power if there is a very large pool of players, which would probably make it unworkable at this site.  A benefit of KRACH is that it keeps track of what your opponents do after you play them, and adjusts your rating accordingly.  For example, if you are matched with a low rated alias player who later becomes high rated, your rating is adjusted upward as he moves up to take into account that his skill level was higher than his rating would have suggested at the time you played him.  

 

A big negative of the ELO system is that it reacts too much for a good streak or bad streak of a player, leading to wild swings in rating.  It's mainly a "What have you done lately?" ranking.  See my post here for more explanation about this:  http://forum.strateg...erpted/?p=44364

 

I would disagree though with Losermaker that the system gives an advantage to those who play more games.  Once a player as played enough games to reach his "true" ranking (and Losermaker's 600 games are more than enough), then unless a player is constantly improving his game, there is just as much chance that his rating with drop by playing more games than that his rating with increase.  



#33 Walhall

Walhall

    Bomb

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 68 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Colonel

Posted 27 May 2016 - 08:09 PM

http://metaforge.net...type=1&period=0

 

http://metaforge.net...type=1&period=0

 

http://metaforge.net...type=1&period=0



#34 sevenseas

sevenseas

    Major

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,037 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 27 May 2016 - 08:14 PM

Do any of those players have names on Stratego.com? 


I play as Sevenseas & Don't Cry

#35 --Wogomite--

--Wogomite--

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 578 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 27 May 2016 - 08:19 PM

                                                          Stratego.com ELO

1. Hielco

2. SEKERTZISS

3. Sohal

4. Nortrom

5. Laughing

 

                                 Nick, Fleur, and Napoleon's Clean Ranking

 

1. Hielco

2. SEKERTZISS

3. Nortrom

4. Sohal

5. Manning2Cruz

 

 

                                             (TRP) Masters Results

 

1. Hielco

2. Playa1

3. Nortrom

4. Enigma

5. Spyros77

 

 

                                      (WCO) 1st World online Championship

 

1. Morx

2. Nortrom

3. Hielco

4. SEKERTZISS

5. Garulfo

 

                                                                       Metaforge

 

 

                  2010                           2012                                              2013

 

1. lightwing (Nortrom)           1. Hielco                            1. lightwing (Nortrom)

2. Hielco                                  2. Sohal                             2. Hielco

3. NE-Pats010304                   3. lightwing (Nortrom)     3. Sohal

4. Sohal                                   4. BlasdeLezo                   4. Gkaros

5. Sadistic                               5. Gkaros                           5. BladesdeLezo


  • texaspete09 likes this

#36 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,502 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 27 May 2016 - 08:39 PM

>I would disagree though with Losermaker that the system gives an advantage to those who play more games.

 

On the most part I agree, but if a player really plays a very small number of games (as in Losermaker's case) then they are likely to fall relatively as ELO inflation increases.



#37 Losermaker

Losermaker

    Major

  • Moderators
  • 1,017 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 28 May 2016 - 12:00 AM

@ Theo and Prof,

Yes that is true I will drop as everyone goes higher.

As for playing more games, you can take SEKERTZISS for a great example, he does not have quite the amazing win loss ratio of co, so or lighty, but he plays a good amount of games with a decent ratio, so he has moved up to #2. Sevenseas is another example, he has a good enough ratio that he is slowly, even through some big drops, reaching a new high elo rating.

 

I could very well be wrong, and I don't have all the stats to back it up, but IMO if you have a ratio above 75% and play regularly, you are going to move up even if it is slowly.

 

Only thing about my 600 games prof, is that you can take out about 100 quickies, and about 50 playing with my dad. and about another 50 in friendlies and tourneys. ;)



#38 KARAISKAKIS

KARAISKAKIS

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,493 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 28 May 2016 - 05:08 AM

                                                          Stratego.com ELO

1. Hielco

2. SEKERTZISS

3. Sohal

4. Nortrom

5. Laughing

 

                                 Nick, Fleur, and Napoleon's Clean Ranking

 

1. Hielco

2. SEKERTZISS

3. Nortrom

4. Sohal

5. Manning2Cruz

 

 

                                             (TRP) Masters Results

 

1. Hielco

2. Playa1

3. Nortrom

4. Enigma

5. Spyros77

 

 

                                      (WCO) 1st World online Championship

1. Morx

2. Nortrom

3. Hielco

4. SEKERTZISS

5. Garulfo

 

 

                                                                       Metaforge

 

 

                  2010                           2012                                              2013

 

1. lightwing (Nortrom)           1. Hielco                            1. lightwing (Nortrom)

2. Hielco                                  2. Sohal                             2. Hielco

3. NE-Pats010304                   3. lightwing (Nortrom)     3. Sohal

4. Sohal                                   4. BlasdeLezo                   4. Gkaros

5. Sadistic                               5. Gkaros                           5. BladesdeLezo

 

 

Αccording International Stratego Rating (Kleier )  http://greg.kleier.n...sel=0&nat[]=all

 

RANKING                                RATING

 

1. Morx                       1. Morx

2. Nortrom                 2. Nortrom

3. Hielco                     3. Hielco

4. SEKERTZISS         4. Manning2Cruz

5. Losermaker            5. SEKERTZISS



#39 The Maestro

The Maestro

    Major

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,217 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Scout

Posted 28 May 2016 - 08:41 AM

I really think you nailed it Losermaker.

 

ELO is only usefull to give you some idea and then immediately forget about it. I am still amazed how obsessed some people are with it. Several people even wrote about their addiction of climbing the ELO ladder and how it even affected their "real" life (Kernal Mustard as a great example). Others are not so open about "their problem" to themselves and drive themself (and others) insane. Even "help" from people like Laughing and Waterfall (and countless others - just look at the ELO rating and start...well...eh ....laughing) who clearly showed ELO can be a complete hoax does/did not "cure" them but only made them more bitter/frustrated. The message should be very clear though: stop living your lives around ELO and an even better advise, stop living it around stratego (the game itself and for some others: -spamming- the forum).  Just be like Losermaker and many others: play some games occasionally, preferably friendlies against family and real life friends and join tournaments. Leave the ELO (fake) rat race to the people that apparantly have a lot of time to WASTE (and they are entitled to do that). Just go outside, live a real life and have fun.

 

So far, so good and it all seems pretty easy as we just forget about the ELO list and therfor also the "clean" list. So what we have left are tournament results. Based on the above it should be clear that tournaments should not have ANY relation with ELO or have restrictions about who is allowed to play (based on crazy/unfair standards like nationality etc). Seeding based on ELO is part of that.

 

This lead to TC in 2014 coming up with the divisions system. It combined several HUGE plusses. First, every player played the same amount of games and met EVERY other player. So it was a semi-closed system where there can be no "fake" inflation by playing a lot of other (less skilled) players to gain points. Second, since the whole system was build around ONLY 2 tournaments per year (the Summer Mid year Divisions and the End of Year Masters), it allowed players that don't want to be around ALL the time to show their skills. Players like playa1, enigma, lonello and many others clearly proved what the benefits/results of such a system are. For those two big division tournaments per year we also allowed players to arrange their games by themselves (with help from TC, although I could better say, the AMAZING Papillon). It worked very well because players with a busy life would just play many of their games in a certain period, could then stay away for a while (weeks- if they planned it right) and only the last four weeks had a weekly program (although players could play all their games long before that, and some did).  We also held two open tournaments per year (the double elimination ST and AT); they were held mainly to get new people into the divisions, as they could qualify by their endrank in those open tournaments. It also gave the "addicts" a full year program. That was however not a priority at all, as it was all about only the TWO big tournaments per year.

 

The system was still a work in progress and we had to adjust a few things along the way. The promotion/degradation was a great tool for the Year End Masters, but could not be used during MYD (as it would give a free pass for the first two D2 finishers into D1 Masters, which was not desired); some other aspects needed fixing as well. If someone ended Top 4 in ST they were immediately invited for the next divisions tournament in D1 (and rightfully so), however we did not (yet) give that same treatment to the AT top 4; we were still working on that and even suggested it (in fact urged) to the TC of AT 2015 before it started as we saw top names like Ace, Sohal and Losermaker entering. The new TC decided not to "change the current rules". It was not the best decision, but an understandable one as they were only with the 2 of them by that time and completely new to all of that. Sadly it did result to even the winner of that tournament not being invited to the Masters 2015.

 

For the 2016/17 there was another new TC and they took a very good step by changing the qualification to Year End Masters by including ALL the winners of a tournament. Another positive was that instead of the top 8 TRP finishers directly qualifying to the Masters (which really needed adjustment) only the top 4 can be sure now, although it will probably end up with the top 6, which is also perfectly fine. 

 

However....by dropping the MYD/Summer divisions (and by doing so, dropping the entire divisions system) the "part-time" players are out of the mix again. Getting rid of the "feel free to play when you want/can-principle" for the Masters (already did that for the 2015 version) and change it to 1 per week is another clear sign that we are back to tournaments ran by, but more important aimed at the (very) high frequency players. That is wrong, unfair and is not helping/building the community or the level of the competition. Reading that ELO will be involved in one of the tournaments is an extra blow, but not a surprise as it totally fits in the mindset of the people that live by (clean) ELO ratings.

 

Several people understand it will lead to problems/less fun (see the Questions for 2016/17 season) but it falls on deaf ears, not because people are bad guys/girls but because there are 2 different types here: the (very) fanatic ones and the ones that just love to play (but not at all costs). And it is clear that, where there was some balance last year, it is now all the first group in charge/aimed at. I do want to tell those people one more time though that by using all kind of selection methods and exclusivity tactics you will not make any new friends or unite but instead just divide and leave people (often honest, hardworking, busy folks that just grace you with spending some of their little free time by showing their amazing skills) out. It means that you will only play those same (hardcore addicts) time and time again, with the result being the EXACT opposite of what I think your goal is (or at least what you claim): finding out who are the best and how it compares to your own skill. To me it is mindnumbing.... 


  • Kambia and cflag like this

#40 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,502 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 28 May 2016 - 09:33 AM

Thanks for your feedback.

>Getting rid of the "feel free to play when you want/can-principle" for the Masters (already did that for the 2015 version) and change it to 1 per week

Let's be fair - this is not a valid criticism as players are not forced to play one game a week in Masters Divs - many players moved games around in weeks they were absent, and this will be possible again this season.

> Sadly it did result to even the winner of that tournament not being invited to the Masters 2015

Also not true, all players who played in a tournament during the season were invited

>ELO will be involved in one of the tournaments is an extra blow
Understandably players are divided on this. Two of the three tournaments remain unseeded, with one tournament now seeded. There is surely room in the season for one seeded tournament. How would you seed a tournament without using player rankings? (I know you wouldn't have one at all). A tournament season with three unseeded ranking tournaments lacks a little variation. Look at the tournament seasons for all sports and tell me that there are no seeded competitions! In fact, it is a little strange not to run one.

>it will lead to problems/less fun
Can you elaborate on the problems and the reduced fun that you envisage?

>'part-time players are out of the mix'
Removing the flexible divisions tournament from the summer means that some players who would have been able to play in a tournament that required less of a commitment will I accept mean that they may be unable to play in the Champions League.

As suggested in other threads, the ideal solution for part-time players is a really flexible tournament. These tournaments need to be of significant length, and thus are ideally positioned outside of the TC tournament season. No-one is stopping anyone from running a tournament here if they want to - TC are running a program and they clearly cannot satisfy everyone, but do their best to have a varied tournament season.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users