Jump to content


Photo

Are the top five the best five?


  • Please log in to reply
175 replies to this topic

#41 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,497 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Colonel

Posted 28 May 2016 - 09:46 AM

Maestro, how did you keep all of it bottled up inside all this time? :)

What you bring to this discussion is an amazing command of the facts. But I would like to rise in defense of ELO just a bit. This site is about playing games and it's not the norm for most people to play friendlies here. It's the norm to check Ranked Match or Battle *ranked* and start a game. They don't even allow you to talk to your friends in the new app that I play on exclusively, so arranging friendlies is all that harder. ELO rankings are a natural part of the process of playing a computer-paired game and I don't think ELO is as worthless as you seem to make it sound. When the tournament winners always dovetail with the high ELO ranked players, there's got to be something said for ELO rankings. No one in the 400's is going to best the likes of the first five pages of platinum players to win the crown in a tournament.

So I think ELO seeding has clear merit for tournament purposes. But I do agree with some of the other things that you have stated.

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


#42 cflag

cflag

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 730 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Spy

Posted 28 May 2016 - 09:58 AM

 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, 

One of the best post at this forum.Huge LIKE



#43 --Wogomite--

--Wogomite--

    Lieutenant

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

Posted 28 May 2016 - 10:22 AM

                                     Stratego.com ELO

1. Hielco-----------1211

2. SEKERTZISS- 1130

3. Sohal------------1092

4. Nortrom--------1069

5. Laughing------ 1049

 

                                 Nick, Fleur, and Napoleon's Clean Ranking

 

1. Hielco------------1211

2. SEKERTZISS--1130

3. Nortrom---------1119

4. Sohal-------------1092

5. Manning2Cruz-1045

 

 

                                             (TRP) Masters Results

 

1. Hielco-------46

2. Playa1-------46

3. Nortrom-----45

4. Enigma------41

5. Spyros77---34

 

 

                                      (WCO) 1st World online Championship

 

1. Morx---------------52

2. Nortrom----------51

3. Hielco-------------49

4. SEKERTZISS---45

5. Garulfo-----------45

 

 

                                                                       Metaforge

 

 

                  2010                           2012                                              2013

 

1. lightwing (Nortrom)--20901           1. Hielco--------------------11092            1. lightwing (Nortrom)--6302

2. Hielco--------------------13630           2. Sohal---------------------8475              2. Hielco--------------------6282

3. NE-Pats010304(M2C)-8757             3. lightwing (Nortrom)-8174               3. Sohal--------------------5641

4. Sohal---------------------8074              4. BlasdeLezo------------6614              4. Gkaros------------------2439

5. Sadistic----------------- 7757              5. Gkaros------------------4925              5. BladesdeLezo--------2417

 

                                                          

                                                            Kleier

 

                            Ranking                                                                               Rating                                          

 

                     1. Morx                                                           1. Morx

                     2. Nortrom                                                      2. Nortrom

                     3. Hielco                                                         3. Hielco

                     4. SEKERTZISS                                              4. Manning2Cruz

                     5. Losermaker                                               5. SEKERTZISS



#44 --Wogomite--

--Wogomite--

    Lieutenant

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

Posted 28 May 2016 - 11:20 AM

After looking at these lists I have made an observation. I have always thought that Hielco and sohal were the two always rivaling and fighting it out but this list proves otherwise. Nortrom and Hielco seem to be two that can't seem to make up their mind on an alpha male. Like a fight where no one is giving up and determination will last years on end, this is one (literally) of a lifetime. If that's not better then Rocky, I don't know what is.



#45 scottrussia

scottrussia

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 821 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Major

Posted 28 May 2016 - 02:31 PM

Maestro, how did you keep all of it bottled up inside all this time? :)

What you bring to this discussion is an amazing command of the facts. But I would like to rise in defense of ELO just a bit. This site is about playing games and it's not the norm for most people to play friendlies here. It's the norm to check Ranked Match or Battle *ranked* and start a game. They don't even allow you to talk to your friends in the new app that I play on exclusively, so arranging friendlies is all that harder. ELO rankings are a natural part of the process of playing a computer-paired game and I don't think ELO is as worthless as you seem to make it sound. When the tournament winners always dovetail with the high ELO ranked players, there's got to be something said for ELO rankings. No one in the 400's is going to best the likes of the first five pages of platinum players to win the crown in a tournament.

So I think ELO seeding has clear merit for tournament purposes. But I do agree with some of the other things that you have stated.

---------------------------------------------

 

No one has........................................YET!

 

That is why there are tournaments.  Spartan Warriors will be back for the next one!!!!

 

Seed it however you want!  We want #1 and then #2 and then #3!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

The Bigger they are!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

 

 


​Spartan Warriors

KING of the Battlefield!!!!!!


#46 scottrussia

scottrussia

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 821 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Major

Posted 28 May 2016 - 02:37 PM

Whoever wins the ongoing tournament will be the best.  And then the winner of the next tournament will be the best.  And on and on it goes. 

 

That is why people enjoy watching sports.  You never know when the "unbeatable" will suddenly be beaten.  The nice thing about tournaments is that you ideally have X number of people going in that believe they can be #1.  And only one will achieve it!

 

The thrill of victory and the agony of defeat (which today involves my wife asking me every 30 minutes when my next match is.... and then laughing)...........


  • --Wogomite--, Napoleon 1er and TheOptician like this

​Spartan Warriors

KING of the Battlefield!!!!!!


#47 KARAISKAKIS

KARAISKAKIS

    General

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

Posted 28 May 2016 - 08:46 PM

 

 

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.

 

A huge LIKE :)  also from me for this statement. I totally agree with this point of view as I have already posted and proved with my reset of my main account to bronze spy.   http://forum.strateg...iaa/#entry53791

 

 

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.

 

 

''based on crazy/unfair standards like nationality etc''

A huge ?   :blink: for this statement .

Please clarify what do you mean with the above sentence.

If you mean that NASF or GOSC  events which have such restrictions use crazy/ unfair standars,  I think that you must explain with more details why you think so.

 

 



#48 Morx

Morx

    Lieutenant

  • WC Online Team
  • 719 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 28 May 2016 - 10:29 PM

I think its a continuous investment to play with the top players, just some people have more talent and others are more willing to invest time.  It took me years to go from a player in the best 20 in the world to a player that could reach the top 10.

After reaching that level of play I actually won a few big tournaments. When playing less again I slightly dropped, but most of the skills stay with you. This is probably the same for the other high ranked players. To reach the top of the ELO and to be top in a given year you have to invest the time, else it just relies on your natural talent to win games and in this competition that is just not good enough to be number one.

 

There are a few players with a better deep understanding of this game than anyone else around, some of them play on this site. The nicest thing that can happen is that you can see them play while discussing the game (why did you do that move?). I dare to say that per hour spend learning this game those were the best moments for me.


  • KARAISKAKIS, Nortrom, Losermaker and 2 others like this

#49 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,497 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Colonel

Posted 29 May 2016 - 02:32 AM

The nicest thing that can happen is that you can see them play while discussing the game (why did you do that move?). I dare to say that per hour spend learning this game those were the best moments for me.


A video that was made by and commented on, in play by play fashion, by those same elite players would truly be an unparalleled learning device. Does such exist?

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


#50 Morx

Morx

    Lieutenant

  • WC Online Team
  • 719 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 29 May 2016 - 08:31 AM

Gary, in the time that I learned the game proper online play was not so wild spread. The best players met each other in tournaments which only happened few times a year. Having the option to play more and having relatively easy access to stronger players, made it possible for talented newcomers to learn the game much faster.  There are some 800-900+ players on this site that only learned the game in the last 2 years.

 

Stratego is a game of information and the very good players I know all had to put in their time over the years, so most of them don't feel like educating the masses and more importantly their direct opponents on the ranking lists.



#51 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    General

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,863 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 29 May 2016 - 11:01 AM

I can understand the reluctance of some world top players not to wish to transmit their skills acquired over 20 years but i'm not sure this is best tactics. ...as you say there are many 900+ players who learned the game and acquired those skills within less than 2-3 years. It's just a question of possibly one more year and they will reach that top 10 level by themselves. If the current top 10 would agree to share their skills yes they may harm their own level but they will help many others to reach the same so at the end who really wants to be no 1 will need to be even better than today's top 10 ... so the overall world stratego best skills will be improved. I think that this is a good goal that involves team work ... increase as much as possible the world's best stratego skills ... not personal skills but overall ...
Just an opinion...
  • TemplateRex likes this
If you don't know where you go ... you have a lot of chance to arrive elsewhere ...

#52 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,497 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Colonel

Posted 29 May 2016 - 02:22 PM

Well, that's noble Napoleon 1er, but if I were a top player I guess I wouldn't feel like sharing any secrets myself. Let the young whippersnappers figure out how to beat me first, I'd say. :)

I thought Morx was hinting that some wonderful instruction like that existed online somewhere.

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


#53 The Maestro

The Maestro

    Major

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

Posted 29 May 2016 - 05:17 PM

A huge LIKE :) also from me for this statement. I totally agree with this point of view as I have already posted and proved with my reset of my main account to bronze spy.


Good to hear that you have your priorities straight! I guess that also means you back me when I say ELO should have no influence on any tournament made by the official TC (who should stand up for all the players, not just a -select- group) and a different way should be found. I suggest to allow ALL division players (starting with the ones that finished the Year End Masters without yellow cards) into the main part of seeded tournament without any nonsense. If that means that instead of 8 groups of 4, there will be 8 groups of 8, which will lead to only ONE extra week for the tournament, but way more fun and matches for ALL the players. And one extra week is nothing, as the current tournament is now also one week behind. I still think CL would be better in Autumn (instead of another DE tournament) and summer would be better off with a Divisions tournament, but that is just an extra remark.


''based on crazy/unfair standards like nationality etc''
A huge ? :blink: for this statement .
Please clarify what do you mean with the above sentence.
If you mean that NASF or GOSC events which have such restrictions use crazy/ unfair standars, I think that you must explain with more details why you think so.

I think special Greek, US, Dutch and especially junior tournaments are great, so I have nothing against that, although I do not like it if it breaches privacy (having to provide personal data etc).

However with my remark I was pointing at the team tournament. I don't like the way it is being set up. It should be open to all players, not limited to 4 or 5 per country. It should be open to as many teams possible. That "national" team aspect is also something I am really not fond of. It would be much nicer if all kind of teams can enter. If that means an entire Greek team, or even better THREE entire Greek teams (there are enough Greek players), several Dutch teams, etc but also the possibility of other teams (for example a Mod team, A Clinton team, a Trump team, a Spartan Warriors team, a junior team, a female team or whatever team people would like to make.

That way ALL players can join the fun instead of just a VERY selective group. It will be much much better, because let's be honest it is really not important (or a feat) which "country" is "the strongest".





#54 --Wogomite--

--Wogomite--

    Lieutenant

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

Posted 29 May 2016 - 05:51 PM

 

However with my remark I was pointing at the team tournament. I don't like the way it is being set up. It should be open to all players, not limited to 4 or 5 per country. It should be open to as many teams possible. That "national" team aspect is also something I am really not fond of. It would be much nicer if all kind of teams can enter. If that means an entire Greek team, or even better THREE entire Greek teams (there are enough Greek players), several Dutch teams, etc but also the possibility of other teams (for example a Mod team, A Clinton team, a Trump team, a Spartan Warriors team, a junior team, a female team or whatever team people would like to make.

 

That way ALL players can join the fun instead of just a VERY selective group. It will be much much better, because let's be honest it is really not important (or a feat) which "country" is "the strongest". 

 

 


 

 

 

I do also agree with you and would love an alternative from the way it is being done now. The one argument that makes their way make since is the fact that if there were two American teams, the one could lose on purpose to the other to give them free points. The way I could see preventing this is for none of the teams of the same nationality be able to play each other unless you simply have all the American teams play first and pick the best to actually participate. Same with dutch, Greek, or any other team. One other problem I have is that the NASF has essentially prevented any north American team from being noticed. The NASF represents a whole continent while these other teams represent a country. Why should the nasf prevent any other team in the entire continent they represent to prove themselves. Well join the NASF if you want to prove yourself you may be thinking. Why should they have to? I think allowing a "regional playoff" would allow the best teams from all over to be allowed the same opportunity as anyone else. The winners of "region or country" would qualify. I tell you what, I know of five American players that are not currently a part of the NASF team tournament that would give even the best of teams a run for there money, why would we not want more and better competition?



#55 Gaius Marius

Gaius Marius

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 599 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Colonel

Posted 29 May 2016 - 06:22 PM

Its funny how in earlier posts people said that win % means nothing, and now people are taking the opposite side.  I think win % is huge among elite players on their main account.  Once you learn the game and have all your beginner losses out of the way, when you make your second account, that is pretty true to the level you are.  If you play 500 games on one account and reach elo 600, then decide to make a new account and only play on that one and you reach 600, it probably will be quicker than the last account and with a better win percentage.  Then from that point on its pretty true to your ability.  If you did this for every 200 elo increase I think you would see all the top players with high win percentage.  If you just learned the game your win percentage will be affected.  But once you learn the game and are established, if you create a new account it will give an accurate representation of your skill level if you look at win percentage.  Now I think what the maestro said about amount of games played is true.  I found that actually having a high win percentage does not mean that if you simply play more games, that you will climb higher.  There is not a linear relationship.  You have to take into account fatigue and desire.  If I play 1-2 games a day, or recently I've been playing 1-2 a week.  I see a steady climb in elo.  When I play too much I lose desire, patience, and focus.  If I lose a bad game, i just stop playing for that day and wait till I've recovered and play again.  Playing too many games, too close to each other, runs the risk of burning one out.  Also, if you just play games all day, and don't have a job or another hobby, you run the risk of Stratego becoming an addiction.  When your games are going well you feel high, when you lose you feel depressed.  You do not earn a survival off of this, so you should not place an overly high emphasis on this game.  It should be something that you play when you feel focused and ready for a challenge, and otherwise you should just live your life.  If someone just uses this as a time waster, they probably arnt too high up on ratings, if they take it seriously, they probably are.  Shoot I have conversations with high level players on here (top 20)  who have all said they just don't have time to fly to Europe for the world championships.  I still think Pim is the best player and he wins all the time.  But pound for pound, those championships could be a lot tougher if people had the time to take it seriously.  Unfortunately people are busy with this thing called life.  


Edited by Gaius Marius, 29 May 2016 - 11:27 PM.

  • Fairway likes this

"Everyone pities the weak, jealousy you have to earn."


#56 Morx

Morx

    Lieutenant

  • WC Online Team
  • 719 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 29 May 2016 - 06:44 PM

I agree on something Gaius touches here: if there was a large amount of sponsor money and a big commercial market with media coverages etcetera, there would be more people interested to play and spend the time it takes to become really good like in chess. Im not saying this is better by the way. Just that it would happen.

 

In the past I was at a chess tournament where the best player was kind off a national legend but he was there just for the prizes. He did not thank the sponsor in his victory speech (a local company owner that just happened to like chess). He did not wait for the tournament to finish, he just wanted to go because he might still be able to play in another place that same evening.

 

This guy had something in common with some of the highest level Stratego players that I did not mention in my earlier post. He had a very strong will to win. I noticed that to win tournaments this will is also required. In this Stratego is like any other (mind)sport.



#57 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,498 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 29 May 2016 - 09:34 PM

This topic seems to have split into a number of paths. For those wishing to continue discussing the TC season, perhaps this should best be discussed here:

 

http://forum.strateg...ns-league-2016/



#58 scottrussia

scottrussia

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 821 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Major

Posted 30 May 2016 - 02:28 AM

Gaius,

I would keep in mind that there is a whole class of players that are similar to myself.  I usually don't have much time.  Sometimes I'm at my business and have 20 minutes.  I log on and play a game - the player takes 15 seconds for each of the first 4 moves after taking 5 minutes to set up.  Guess what - I am not finishing that game.  I click on the surrender button and play another.  So even if I win - I've got a 50% win percentage.  (and that's ignoring the fact that my kids & friends play on the same account).   I have other concerns in life that matter.  So I'm quite happy to have "good days" at stratego and "bad days" at stratego.  There are many like myself.  That's why I think its great that there are tournaments - put your army on the field and have at it. 

 

And that's not to mention that the game should be fun.  I would assume that even the very top players play friendly games that involve simply having fun.  So if you want to run your marshall up the left side killing pieces - do it.  If you want to put your flag in the front row - do it.  Most of us simply do that with ranked games and it doesn't really bother me to lose ELO points.

 

Its certainly true that if there was "big money" involved there would be more people playing the game as a serious matter.  I assume that they would be MIT phd's and every move would become a calculated "win share" or "battle advantage" or some other catch phrase.  IMO stratego has already been turned too much into chess.  I grew up playing with the rules that 9's cannot fly directly into another piece - and IMO it is a much more creative game under those rules.  Information should come at a cost - and under those rules the cost was board position.  Now against top players I feel like I'm playing chess - and frankly its less enjoyable.  So I'll live without my Pepsi sponsorship, Spartan Warriors prefer Coke anyways! (unless Pepsi bought all the rights to stratego and changed the rules back!  Then I'll dump Coke!!!)


​Spartan Warriors

KING of the Battlefield!!!!!!


#59 --Wogomite--

--Wogomite--

    Lieutenant

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

Posted 30 May 2016 - 12:21 PM

Scottrussia, I agree fully that you along with others are good at stratego, I even believe that there are low ranks floating around not caring about "just another game" and losing games they could win all the time. Many players wait until it means something or its important to play their best. I have had many 400 level players think, oh a platinum, I have to try to beat this one. Let me tell you, some of these guys really have a lot of fight in their dog and actually can play a strong game but there is one sad issue. These many people also don't have the gumption to do it every game as you have even said in your above post. It is ok that you don't want to do what it takes to be the best, I understand it is a little stressful to have so much responsibility every single game and yes for someone like you that cares not a bit about elo, why would you put that stress on top of yourself for no reason? I will say on the other hand scott, I used to play like that. I got completely tired of it. I knew I was good but my elo never showed and it frustrated me. I would get serious for a week go on a winning streak, lose a game and then lose like two more because I am playing frustrated and I drop right down a weeks worth of progress. The next few weeks I seem to avoid taking the game serious for whatever reason and then out of know where care again, try to climb elo and the cycle started all over. I unlike you do not play Stratego as fun being the only reason. I am very competitive. If I feel as though I can potentially do something then why would I not want to actually try and prove it. I was at a crossing point, either I feel like I am done with Stratego.com out of frustration because of my own mistakes and lack of hard pressed consistency or I do what I know it takes to stop losing games my opponent did not earn and playing impatient is not that. Getting frustrated at my opponent is not that. Playing a game immediately after losing one is not that. Needing to lotto after my opponent lottos is not that. Rushing my gen after finding the marsh to speed the game up is not that. Assumptions and trying to get lucky is not that. Panicking is not that....doing "that" is not the issue for a lot of us a handful of games. The hard part is doing "that"....every single game!!! The most beautiful minds in my opinion are not those of which can abide to these simple rules, they are the ones that are dependable each and every game, each and every move, rarely straying from the principles that win.

 

I appreciate people playing Stratego just for fun. Without a love of a sport from a large amount of people participating and watching, the best in that sport would be no big deal.


  • The Prof and Fairway like this

#60 --Wogomite--

--Wogomite--

    Lieutenant

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

Posted 30 May 2016 - 04:01 PM

I updated this weeks top five "Fleur, Nick, and Napoleon's Clean Ranking" on the front page.

 

Elo is the same accept Nortrom going up 5 points. He seems to be the only one with a fight in him at the moment. SEKERTZISS played a few recently but has stopped again. The other three have a combined two or three games played it seems in the past month or more.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users