User Name: Password:
New User Registration
Moderator: rod03801 
 Feature requests

Do you miss something on BrainKing.com and would you like to see it here? Post your request into this board!
If there is a more specific board for the request, (i.e. game rule changes etc) then it should be posted and discussed on that specific board.

For further information about Feature Requests, please visit this link on the Brainking.Info site : http://brainking.info/archives/20-About-feature-requests.html


Messages per page:
List of discussion boards
You are not allowed to post messages to this board. Minimum level of membership required for posting on this board is Brain Pawn.
Mode: Everyone can post
Search in posts:  

30. January 2008, 11:31:29
AbigailII 
Subject: Re: Rating Lists
nabla: Measuring activity is not easy to do. A Glicko system is better than an ELO system, but both Glicko and ELO assume matches are almost "instantaneous". That's not true for BK. Someone can be quite active (that is, making lots and lots of moves), but lose "activity" (increasing the RD value in Glicko, or disappearing from the rating lists in the current system) because his games are finished yet. In theory, it's even possible for someone finishing just 2 games a year to remain in the rating list, while someone who plays 500 of them each year disappears for months, just because all his games finish in November.

Having said that, Glicko would be an improvement over the current rating system. Its activity measure isn't perfect for a site like BK, but much better than we have now. And any rating system worth its salt should not consider a match won 6-4 to be equivalent to a match won 10-0. (In proper ELO, someone winning a 10 game match 6-4 may lose rating points (the rating difference gives an expectation of what the final score of a match should be; if you do better, you win points, if you do worse, you lose, regardless of the final score)).

30. January 2008, 20:18:18
pauloaguia 
Subject: Re: Rating Lists
AbigailII: And any rating system worth its salt should not consider a match won 6-4 to be equivalent to a match won 10-0.
In theory I agree. But in practice, I'm not so sure: when on a 10 game match, if I win the first 6 games in a row my opponents may choose to forfeit the rest of the games in the match by resigning early. If their BKR will be adversly affected by doing so, then they will prefer to take all the games through the end, trying to get to that 6-4. The outcome of the match will be the same (I win) but I'll just have to wait a lot longer to get to it.
And if Fencer ever gets to implement a ResignMatch option, that doesn't make you go through every single game left, how would this score be counted then?

31. January 2008, 02:15:47
Ceiter 
Subject: Re: Rating Lists
AbigailII: "And any rating system worth its salt should not consider a match won 6-4 to be equivalent to a match won 10-0."

I disagree. Isn't the whole point of a match to treat a group of games as one game? The way you propose it, it seems like it would be more like playing 10 normal games separately, which IMHO defeats the purpose of a match.

Date and time
Friends online
Favourite boards
Fellowships
Tip of the day
Copyright © 2002 - 2024 Filip Rachunek, all rights reserved.
Back to the top