Message for the owner General forum

18 replies. Last post: 5 hours ago

Reply to this topic Return to forum

Message for the owner
  • Maurizio De Leo at 2017-07-24

    Hi. This message is for the owner of this website.

    I intend to create a page similar to

    To do so I’m planning to scrape the information from the HTML page

    Of course with some system in place to minimize the load on the server (timed requests or something similar).

    The person that I hired to look at the programming says that nevertheless scraping will put a load on the site and having some direct access or some type of API would be better. 

    Is that possible ? I’m agreeable to pay a small amount to allow for this to happen.

  • Mirko Rahn at 2017-07-27

    Why are people so obsessed with numbers?? Isn’t this site for fun and about to know yourself? Why are people competing in their spare time against each other?? Isn’t the economic system putting enough pressure on them?

    So please don’t load the server, instead invest your money into something actually valuable, like vacation or good food or a party with friends. Or just send it to Richard to support his great work for the community.

  • terrance806 at 2017-07-27

    I like numbers, its how my head works

  • klaashaas ★ at 2017-07-27

    I love numbers too! And competition. And vacation. And good food & parties... Why can’t we have it all?

  • Maurizio De Leo at 2017-07-27

    I think competitiveness is part of human nature and “Agon” is one of the characteristic of games.

    I would not say it is an obsession, but an healthy “push” to improve.

    If anything, abstract games have taught me humbleness because no matter how good you are, there is always somebody / something better than you.

  • mmKALLL ★ at 2017-07-27

    At any rate, I think it might be easier to contact Richard using the contact form at the very bottom of the page, he responds to that more often and that way things can be kept private as necessary.

    Still, hiring someone to re-implement Monster Ratings? Quite a bit of enthusiasm you have there, it seems.

  • Marius Halsor at 2017-07-27

    You could also try to arrange a third Monstership, of course. If you find enough players willing to invest the insane amount of time such a tournament requires...

  • Florian Jamain at 2017-07-28

    Could be nice to have it!

    Maybe it could even be an argument for new players to come here which is for me the most important point, get a bigger and bigger community of players. 

  • passenger at 2017-07-28

    I like numbers as well. Also it would be nice to have some other statistics here like the number of won championships and tournaments, players vs player stats, % of wins (as “white” and “black”) etc. 

  • Maurizio De Leo at 2017-07-28

    [q] Still, hiring someone to re-implement Monster Ratings? Quite a bit of enthusiasm you have there, it seems. [/q]

    Maybe “hiring” was the wrong term. I simply set up a project on . I will pay a small amount of money for the project, but I have not technically “hired” and employee :-D

  • Florian Jamain at 2017-07-28

    +1 passenger 

  • Mirko Rahn at 2017-07-28

    Okay, this is your world, obviously. What remains for me to say is: Please, don’t destroy my world by putting too much pressure on the server. As always: In doubt, don’t!

  • Mirko Rahn at 2017-07-28

    Oh, and for all the number lovers, here is one as a gift for you guys: ({({},{})},{({({},{})},{})})

  • Mirko Rahn at 2017-07-28

  • Maurizio De Leo at 2017-08-12

    The project is ongoing, and we have a sample up and running, although with a few bugs to iron out. While doing this exercise, I noticed some “quirks” of the Little Golem Database.  The games are identified by a base name and a variant identifier i.e. Chess.Default.

    I don’t want to re-ignite the discussion on the ratings for Go; if Richard wants to keep the same ratings for all variants so be it. However the way the database is split seems strange:

    GO.Size19x19, GO.Size37x37, GO.Toroidal Go, GO.Random100 and GO.Hahn are all variants of the game of GO.  Instead Go9x9.Size9x9 and Go13x13.Size13x13 are their own separate game.  So we have 3 “games” one with 5 variants and the other two with a single base variant each.  I think it would be better to have 1 “game” (i.e. GO) and 7 variants, especially as they all have a common rating.

    Similarly HEX.Size11 and HEX.Size13 are variants of HEX, while Hex19.Size19 is its own game. We have 2 “games” , one with 2 variants and the other with  only the base variant. In this case, the ratings are the same for the two “variants” of HEX but different for the other “game” Hex19. I suggest it would be better to have only 1 “game” (i.e. HEX) and 3 variants. It is possible to keep the rating of the variants separate if desired, as illustrated by Draughts.

    In fact Draughts.Dameo, Draughts.Checkers and Draughts.International are all variants of the game Draughts, but they keep separate ratings. This is the best solution in my opinion, with one “game” and 3 variants.

  • mmKALLL ★ at 36 hours ago

    The idea I see behind having multiple “games” for different board sizes is to separate the games on the player page. For example, I am often interested to see my 9x9 Go games, but if they were all merged the games would get lost among my 19x19 games.

    In my opinion, 9x9 can’t reasonably be called just a variation, due to a larger strategic shift in the overall game. On the other hand it would be silly to have separate games (and maybe separate ratings!) for things like Go Random100 or Toroidal Go, which are notably less popular (and which most people don’t play as one of their “main games”), but where skill still strongly correlates with regular Go skill.

    In general I agree with Richard’s design decisions, and would consider monster ratings a little off if they did not reflect what’s on the site. Having a rating based on how LG works and a variation based on how you think it should work for Monster Ratings might be a good option. The default sort could be the latter option.

    It is worth noting that WYPS variations have differing ratings as well. However, should they all be counted? Should only the English standard WYPS rating be counted? In my opinion, for Monster Ratings the best way to deal with variations like it and Draughts would be to only count the highest variation’s rating, as that most accurately reflects what the player has invested their time in.

    Just my two cents.

  • Maurizio De Leo at 35 hours ago

    The site is up and running, a few bugs  not-wistanding (i.e the calculation of Go ratings is wrong). You can have a look at

  • mmKALLL ★ at 5 hours ago

    Well, that certainly is something, it got done a lot faster than I thought it would! I like that it looks kinda similar to the old site, while still being new. Now if only I had some idea what the numbers actually mean! :)

    Looks like a  sorting option using Monster Rating is missing too.

Return to forum

Reply to this topic

Include game board: [game;id:123456] or [game;id:123456;move:20] or [game;id:123456;move:20;title:some text]