|
Nov 2019
2:56pm, 25 Nov 2019
23,045 posts
|
fetcheveryone
Right then. If this doesn't work on Monday, please contact Daddy Shark toll free on 1-800-NOTMYFAULT 
1) The new pairing algorithm takes a list of available players in descending ranking order.
2) The top person on the list becomes Player 1.
3) The rest of the list are their potential opponents.
4) Filter that list to exclude everyone they played in their last ten matches.
5) The highest ranked available player becomes Player 2.
6) Go back to step 1 with the remaining players.
This should mean that as of next Monday, you should only face an opponent once every ten weeks at most.
The potential exception is down at the bottom of the list. If you're eleventh or less from bottom, and have played everyone below you, then you'll just get the highest ranked person as your opponent. But I'm guessing that this will be unlikely, as there should be more rankings churn down at the bottom. A win for a 1000 ranked player is worth about 120 places in the rankings.
|
|
Nov 2019
3:15pm, 25 Nov 2019
7,927 posts
|
ITG
I hereby propose a feature that people in the top ten are not permitted to suggest new features to increase their relative advantage
|
|
Nov 2019
3:16pm, 25 Nov 2019
46,502 posts
|
GlennR
I'll vote for that one ITG.
|
|
Nov 2019
3:19pm, 25 Nov 2019
11,500 posts
|
Cerrertonia
Does taking a break cause you to lose some small number of ranking points? In the Chess ELO system, there is a problem with people simply not playing in order to keep their current rating unchanged.
|
|
Nov 2019
3:35pm, 25 Nov 2019
44,048 posts
|
Velociraptor
I was just thinking about that, Cerrertonia. Maybe getting a point or two each time you participate, or even an increasing allocation of "participation points" when you take part for a string of consecutive weeks, would make people think twice about taking a week off when they think they're at high risk of losing.
|
|
Nov 2019
4:05pm, 25 Nov 2019
172 posts
|
Daddy Shark
I'd vote for that too ITG and GlennR (and Wriggling Snake)! It's already a rule I apply to myself, and it's what is holding me back from proposing a midnight Sunday/Monday game end.
Some repetitions would certainly make life harder (arguably it did for VJ, even though he keeps winning). In our case, until this week, VJ was over 100 ranking points below me (not any more of course 'cos he's on a roll to the top, seemingly). For me, the repetitions meant I've almost never played anyone in the top five.
Thanks for your efforts Fetch. Three observations:
I always appreciated that this was likely to be bad luck and not a bug;
I worry that your new system will not always find a solution. I think you've got that covered, though my mind crashed trying to work it through. However, instinctively I feel like a shorter exclusion period (currently 10 weeks) would have more solutions.;
Finally, uber-geeks like JCB (no, not me sir!) will be able to predict our next opponent, I think.
|
|
Nov 2019
6:46pm, 25 Nov 2019
3,159 posts
|
R4R
For pedants, it's Elo (a surname), not ELO
Just saying
|
|
Nov 2019
7:07pm, 25 Nov 2019
2,222 posts
|
Elsie Too
I specifically crossed rugby pitch to get another square
It was a little bit wet!
Not the greatest idea in the world and I missed the square.
|
|
Nov 2019
7:11pm, 25 Nov 2019
10,726 posts
|
NDWDave
Now what would be awesome is it Fetch were able to calibrate the Elo system in line with the probability of winning given the difference in ratings*
*he might already have done this. Or alternatively has better things to do
In other news Hello Chunky Wizard!
|
|
Nov 2019
7:12pm, 25 Nov 2019
10,849 posts
|
Ness
Hello wAckie Race. 👋😁
|
