Forum Message
| City: | Genova  | | Personal Data: | Male, born: Fabruary 17 1968 | | HomePage or other cool site: | http://www.beppi.it | | Membership | 22years 354days ago. | | Last Login | 13years 38days ago. | | Last Move | 13years 77days ago. | Pitch is currently  | |
| Message header | Area/Game: | General | | Topic: | General | | Subject: | Re: A question about ELO | | Posted by: | Pitch  - 22years 249days ago. |
|
|
| Message text Hi. I've devoleped the Elo Glicko system for the Italian Othello Federation (http://www.fngo.it target='_blank'>http://www.fngo.it) and I feel a bit expert of the argument; that system I think is now well working also in Checkers and Risiko. You can get the documentation and the current standings from http://www.fngo.it target='_blank'>http://www.fngo.it .
Glicko is a very interesting generalization of ELO, that adds elasticity to the system allowing to use one single formula to keep track of passive players, newbies and very expert players. Using customized systems, like USCF, is a big error. BTW the author, Prof. Glickmann, is generally happy to help people implement that system.
In Risiko/Risk the problem of multiple players games has been fixed in a very easy way: at the game end you have a classification. Let's suppose that 4 players were playing: the first one is calculated as he had played 3 games and won them all. The second one has played 3 games, lost 1 and won 2, and so on. Then, the variations can be divided by 3 to avoid big oscillations.
With n players the mechanics can be exactly the same.
Please note that it doesn't make sense to link the rating to - for example - a single down of an airplane. The rating calculus should be directly connected to games rules, so the final score is the only parameter that should be considered. In case there are doubts, what should be changed is the final score calculation, not the rating.
Beppi. |
|
|
|
|
Donate
Leagues
Gonzaga
Blue Max
Cartagena
Wooden Ships...
King Me!
VampiRing
