WCDF Ratings Update?

[megamau]

First of all, a big thank you to the mantainer of the ratings; it is a tough job and I know that to criticize is always easier than to do.
I am doing some research on various ratings databases I have some questions:

1) Is the "raw" data available for download ?
2) Is there a table of the initial ratings (i.e. the ones used in the "before" for the tournaments of 2008 ?
3) In the 3move nationals http://icheckers.net/tournaments/showty.php?tyid=11 the "before" rating appear to be missing. Is this correct ?

Some suggestions:
A) It would be nice to insert the links to the players in the tournament cards
B) Similarly, a column with the player number would help reading the pairings
c) The round standings could be a sortable table.

To conclude, a snapshot of the situation of other rating databases. They could be helpful for getting ideas/solutions.

http://tinyurl.com/guhutst

[John Acker]

To add to megamau's list, the North American Scrabble Players Association has an excellent ratings/results site: http://cross-tables.com/.

[clintolsen]

I'd be willing to make the improvements to the tournament results pages if current webmasters need help / don't have time.

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Clint, are you willing to link here game database ?

AM

[clintolsen]

What do you mean?

[Alex_Moiseyev]

What do you mean?

Minimum - load games (if available) from this tournament and connect to players.

[clintolsen]

I can't really promise anything unless someone with access asks me to do it.

[Alex_Moiseyev]

i'll be back to you soon

[champion374]

Latest ratings are out http://www.wcdf.net/ratings.htm August 15th 2016

No titles as yet Players country misisng but nice

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Latest ratings are out http://www.wcdf.net/ratings.htm August 15th 2016

No titles as yet Players country missing but nice

With all my honesty I can guarantee you that this rating doesn't include ACF National at the end of July. My and Sergio rating are exactly the same as we had them before tournament.

August 15 is just a date of publication not "as-of" processing date.

More exciting updates are coming.

AM

[champion374]

Well i hope as soon as end of year 2016.

[champion374]

Im not really puting the ratings in Qustion ,but some people wants to know my fellow play mate Richard Grazette is number 1 in the world
and has not played overseas against harder players.

[Alex_Moiseyev]

my fellow play mate Richard Grazette is number 1 in the world

All he needs - play just one more official game with someone who has rating, drew it and then stay on top of this list for another 3 years

[liam stephens]

It's known as the "Frozen Rating Syndrome".

Several years ago I was asked - What could be done to improve the ratings ?

I replied:

The deflation that has occurred in the ratings is, in my view, due to the scoring system adopted of points per game. This is an inherent defect in the system that cannot be overcome. The opposite inflationary effect, however, can also occur in the case of the frozen rating but that is a separate category. (see list below)

Below is a list of items that may need fixing.

1. The compression syndrome.
The scoring by points per game instead of points per round greatly compresses the bandwith of the ratings.
The scoring by points per ballot (or round) in 3 Move Tournaments would result in a vastly improved rating list, and allow the Elo system to operate in the manner for which it was designed. (as in Chess)
Adherence to scoring by points per game in 3 Move Tournaments will, I believe, only prolong the current unsatisfactory situation.
When I pointed this out on a previous occasion, one commentator suggested that compression would be a good thing as it would lessen the difference between the lower and higher rated players !!

2. The apples and oranges syndrome.
The practice, when calculating the ratings, of including such a wide range of strengths of tournaments from the strongest master tournaments right down to friendly or fun day events, all in one huge amorphous mass.

3. Allocation.
One of the main purposes of the ratings is:
To assist in grading players in tournaments when these are classified as Master, Major, Minor etc. In short to make certain that a player cannot enter a class , below or above that which one belongs.

4. The frozen rating syndrome.
Enter one event and if you come away with a good score, do not enter any further events until the 3 year cycle is up.

[bazkitcase5]

The problem though is that any rating system needs a sheer amount of data to truly be accurate. As of now, there aren't nearly enough checker tournaments for most players to get an accurate rating, unless your one of the few who can travel and play 5+ tournaments per year.

If we switch to round scoring for the ratings, then you get literally half the amount of data than we are already getting. Because our game is different than chess, it might be that we would just be better served if maybe draws cost the better player less points and/or wins reward more points? I don't have enough of an understanding of math to know what kind of adjustments could be made, but I would think there has to be an adjustment that could get the results we want without causing the issues we are currently experiencing.