Clan System Request for Proposals

Originally posted by roma45
I have another good idea
We really need to sort out collusion once and for all
A points removal from the protesters last year and a warning issued will stop it
A vote should happen obviously those involved in the four clans will be banned from voting no accused can be on the jury under and circumstances
Put integrity back then we can move forward

So ...[text shortened]... the ideas about formulas back no sense totally full of loop holes that's what some players want

Hear Hear..........I second that notion. The only ration way forward.

Originally posted by Mctayto
What a plonker
If you want your rating to remain at a given level simply resign all games where you are in a losing position. You actually think that is an improvement to go forward.

And what is wrong with that at least my way you couldn't cheat your way to Clan and Tournament Trophies as you have done for quite a few years
Your rating only goes down when you lose games not give them away

Originally posted by Giannotti
...so maybe the answer is a more dynamic equation, including the five year high, as well as the yearly high, and the current average

...very good point

I've said many times that the current rating is not the most accurate and I know other's agree.
I'm not a leader anymore but all my challenge offers were based on individual ratings and mainly considering the 1 yr and 5 yr ratings.If my players 5 yr max was 1400 I wouldn't entertain any match where the opposition's 5 year was greater than say 1470.I never looked at the overall "total" as this was current rating only.
What about using an average rating for a player excluding the current rating

Originally posted by padger
It is too complicated and I think 90% of clan leaders would find it too complicated
The trouble is you and maybe 1 or 2 others understand what you are going on about but that makes easier for you to manipulate it as you did last year

I don't know why you think it is too complicated, its utilises the same system as the present ratings are based upon, are you saying that is too complicated? Perhaps we should limit the debate to those who understand how the present rating system is calculated otherwise we shall get objections form those who are simply too dim to grasp it.

Originally posted by padger
In my proposal a player who resigns a game would have no reduction in rating

What an absurd suggestion, you could never lose any rating points, all you would need to do was resign your games when you were losing. How long did you spend on this idea?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
What an absurd suggestion, you could never lose any rating points, all you would need to do was resign your games when you were losing. How long did you spend on this idea?

To be fair, Padger is thinking of the other issue of where a player just resigns to lower their rating to get into feasible match ups with lower rated players.

Maybe a clan leader can have it on their stats on home page as wins/draws/losses/resignations/timeout losses.

Originally posted by Silverstriker
To be fair, Padger is thinking of the other issue of where a player just resigns to lower their rating to get into feasible match ups with lower rated players.

Maybe a clan leader can have it on their stats on home page as wins/draws/losses/resignations/timeout losses.

yes but in a rating performance based system this will be detrimental to the clan and as was pointed out, its rather easy to abuse.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
what changes would you make to the constant K

Currently in present formula, K has 3 values:
32 for rating <2000
24 for rating 2000-2400
16 for rating > 2400

Meaning that the value can be arbitrary.
I suggested lowering the value to say 8 for clan games.
That means clan rating can move no more than 8 points up or down after each game where opponent's rating are 400 or more points apart.
For 2 equally rated players, ratings would move only 4 points up or down depending on win or loss.

Russ and clan readers may come up with another K value.
But once clan rating is decoupled from tournament rating, the coding for this is quite simple.

And this will greatly minimize rating manipulation while allowing decided challenges to be closed without too much effect on personal ratings.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Actually I have received private correspondence that a number of clan leaders are really interested in it. You it seems are simply here to cause trouble.

Originally posted by mghrn55
Currently in present formula, K has 3 values:
32 for rating <2000
24 for rating 2000-2400
16 for rating > 2400

Meaning that the value can be arbitrary.
I suggested lowering the value to say 8 for clan games.
That means clan rating can move no more than 8 points up or down after each game where opponent's rating are 400 or more points apart.
For 2 e ...[text shortened]... tion while allowing decided challenges to be closed without too much effect on personal ratings.

Ok great I think its a fine and valid proposal. but eight is too small, you should not be allowed to arbitrarily throw games because the entire point of a performance based system is to prevent such abuses. If you are going to throw games you must be made to suffer for it. Furthermore you might find that the margins are so small between clans that it becomes something of a lottery.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Actually I have received private correspondence that a number of clan leaders are really interested in it. You it seems are simply here to cause trouble.

name them