Author Topic: Ranking system  (Read 3049 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

foxgom

  • Guest
Ranking system
« on: November 04, 2010, 06:33:23 PM »
Hi


is there a description somewhere about how the ranking system works?

e.g. how does an event count as "major" and there be worth more points ?

Does there have to be a certain number of participants?


neil


additz

  • Guest
Re: Ranking system
« Reply #1 on: November 05, 2010, 07:43:06 AM »
Neil,

I had asked the same question in Tiny-Soldiers-Forum.
Didn't answer Leosthenes reply your question?

additz


toby

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Ranking system
« Reply #2 on: November 05, 2010, 08:57:12 AM »
For DBMM, the weighting of the competitions is more of an art than a science. I think only the UK ones get variable weightings. The original idea was that there would be 2 at 120 points, 2 at 100 points and the rest at 80 points. Some are protected, so your score always counts. Of the unprotected ones, the best score are chosen. In total only 6 scores are chosen, summed and the result divided by 6 to get your ranking. If you do less than 6 comps, your score therefore suffers. If you do very badly in a protected comp, your score will suffer - the idea being that the 4 protected comps are the ones that most people go to so if you crash and burn in those it will tell.

On the website, included scores are green, discarded are red. If you hover over a score, you will see which comp it came from.

foxgom

  • Guest
Re: Ranking system
« Reply #3 on: November 05, 2010, 06:53:40 PM »
Hi

Have only played once, as far as the rankings are concerned.

Paris was rated at 120 points.

Who decided that?

What were the criteria?

Just someones opinion or because there were x number of players or because it was international or....?

Can I choose to play a fun army and not be ranked for an event?

Can I register any event for ranking, e.g. Ludwigsburg in Feb 2011?

If so, who do I send the results to?


neil

Tim Child

  • Guest
Re: Ranking system
« Reply #4 on: November 06, 2010, 12:56:42 AM »
The ranking for Paris was based upon comparison with other like events.  I suspect that there was also a desire to make it desirable to attend next year!   :)

At the moment, at least in relation to the UK events, there is no facility to play without it counting for your ranking.  I know that that has been an option in relation to DBM's Glicko-rating in Australia in the past (you had to pre-notify the organisers, IIRC) but personally I always felt that that was potentially unfair on the other competitors - if you enter a competition expecting it to count toward your Glicko-ranking for the year and find yourself drawn against 3 players who have chosen not to count that event, what do you do?

Rankings, ultimately, are intended to be a bit of fun aimed at getting people talking (and taking the rip out of each other) and therefore to generate enthusiasm for and incentive to attend competition (which is why you have to go to at least 6 to get a full ranking score, and the more you do attend the more options you have to drop the poor scores - thus Jim Gibson's ranking ignores a load of scores in the 40s).

Cheers,

Tim Child


Doug M.

  • Guest
Re: Ranking system
« Reply #5 on: November 06, 2010, 10:56:17 PM »
The Australian conditions under which you were allowed to exclude a comp for rankings by prior arrangement was to allow people to take a 'fun' army that might not have been particularly competitive, without unduly penalising their rankings. It worked well, and was used pretty sparingly.

Tim Child

  • Guest
Re: Ranking system
« Reply #6 on: November 07, 2010, 03:06:38 PM »
The Australian conditions under which you were allowed to exclude a comp for rankings by prior arrangement was to allow people to take a 'fun' army that might not have been particularly competitive, without unduly penalising their rankings. It worked well, and was used pretty sparingly.

Of course, if the AP system was perfect, every army would be competitive.   ;)

The rankings system that Neil was referring to here on the DBMM.org site is not like Glicko, in that only the best 6 results for the year count, and the total rankings-points for your best 6 (or all if you have entered no more than 6) competitions is divided by 6.  I don't think that an exclusion is really needed in that context, since if you compete in more than 6 events, your bottom score (e.g. the fun-but-useless army) will drop out of contention and if you compete in no more than 6, then even coming last is better for your ranking score than not competing at all.

Glicko is a bit of a different story, since every game counts, even if you are using a complete no-hope of an army, your dog has just died, the wife has run off with the milkman and your daughter has just confessed that she is pregnant by Lemmy.

Tim Child