1 statistically sound rating system instead of 2 meaningless systems:

I would like to see a statistically sound rating system introduced.
This would be instead of the 2 current ones (normal and master games).
I would also like to see it get updated even when one of the player's tantrix session dies
(must be possible as the result is still getting recorded).

- it shouldn't have an upper bound.
- in general loss of one player should equal gain of the other
(when number of games played by one of the players is low this may not be the case).
- robots rankings should also change and by the same amount as human games.
- rating changes should be reduced when either player has played the other player in recent games. etc.

By ddyer on Sunday, July 13, 2003 - 06:33 am:

In response to yoseph's posting:

The behavior of lobby rankings is intended to encourage and entertain new players, rather than to be an accurate indicator of playing strength.

Master rankings, on the other hand, are based on a handicap model, where a difference of 1000 master points indicates a long term expectation of a win by an average of 1 point.

By JMSC on Sunday, July 13, 2003 - 06:34 am:

I Think that it might be a good idea for the tourney rankings to be based a
little more on lobby ranking and a little less on a). tournament past performance
and b). #of previous tournament games played...
I think this could be usefull because I have faced many opponents with higher
lobby rankings than me in tournaments, but often their ELO is lower than mine
because their ELO is either unofficial or non-existant...
I'm not exactly sure how this could be implicated, but I would rather see games
that would normally be upsets in the lobby also be upsets in tournaments...

By Joe Ruby on Friday, July 25, 2003 - 08:47 pm:

Dave... to comment on your post...
I am definitely not a new player... and definitely not one of the elite players :-P
Still, though, i have played about 3500 games and am stuck in the lobby system because of my very inconsistent play. I would strongly advocate a ranking system that isn't intended to entertain and encourage new players... i was encouraged many games ago, now i would like to see a better system...

By Anonymous on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 06:58 am:

i'm a newbie, and i played a master who's ranked like above me and they won by 7, i lost 9 rank points and they gained 3. i thought that was a bit unfair because they are more experienced than me and i didnt think i should have lost that much ranking points

By Anonymous on Thursday, September 23, 2004 - 06:20 pm:

If robots ranking was able to change I think that its rank would very quickly go down to 0 because so many people play it, 30000 robot games a month or something, it wouldnt take long.