Player rankings inconsistent? General forum
6 replies. Last post: 2020-11-05Reply to this topic Return to forum
shyryan at 2020-11-04
Two questions about player rankings by rating:
1) On the main Twixt PP page, it shows “Rating list - top 10 players”. But if you click “Full list”, it shows a slightly different set of players. Even the number one player, rated 2699, is omitted from the front page list. Why are some players shown and others not?
2) If I view the “Full list” and count how many players are above me, I find my ranking is 48. But when I end a game with another player, it shows how our ratings have changed and then gives my “rating position” as 78. (This is different from ladder/Infinity table position.) Why are the numbers so different?
These examples are both from Twixt PP but it looks like the first issue at least is present in other games as well.
Ray Garrison ★ at 2020-11-04
the “top 10” list only shows players who have been active on littlegolem lately. When you click the full list, it shows all players, inactive or not. So the top twixt player (M. Celuch) at 2699 has not been active at littlegolem lately, but if he were to play a game of anything (not necessarily twixt), he would then show up again on the twixt top ten players....
MisterCat ★ at 2020-11-04
Is that how it works, Ray? What I thought (regarding the top 10 list) is that if you log off, you will disappear. Log back in, and you reappear. Since most players stay logged in permanently, not too many disappear. I have no theory regarding the complete list.
Richard would know, or perhaps ypercube will chime in here!
shyryan at 2020-11-05
That does explain the top 10 list, but not the full list vs. “rating position” inconsistency. That difference makes it seem either like there are many players that are omitted from the full list, or that the “rating position” also takes into account some other factor.
ypaul21 at 2020-11-05
I think that a lot of things have been changing recently, so perhaps it’s just not completely implemented yet.
In my opinion, the rankings should only include players who have participated in rated games in a set period of time (say 1 year?). This would encourage players to continue to play if they want to continue to be ranked. BGA also does something similar, and I think it’s very fair. Dunno if this already is the current implementation on LG.
ypaul21 at 2020-11-05
And to clarify, I mean participating in rated games for that particular variant of that particular game. So if someone were active but they’ve only been playing, say, Chess, they’d still lose their position on the list for Hex if they haven’t played it in a while.