View Single Post
Old 01-17-2013, 12:18 PM   #32
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,246

Originally Posted by Angle Queen View Post
But going to a .25 rating system seems just a bit too much. We're blessed in our area to have lots of players and lots of leagues. A finer rating differentiation might work here, but in other places, where they sometimes have trouble fielding more than 2 or 3 teams per league/ Besides, team/league play is where I've had the best chance to meet more people/players outside of my (playing) comfort zone....both higher and both age and skill level.
Excellent point and one I thought of as well. It appears that they do run quarter-point levels in Atlanta, but they have a huge number of participants so they can do it. Your point is valid for a few, and perhaps more than that, areas of the country where they don't have high levels of participation. To field enough teams, they may be forced to bypass the "lower" quarter-point level and have folks play up.

Originally Posted by Angle Queen View Post
I wish the algorithm more appropriately rewarded an actual "win" and/or de-emphasized the so-called predicted result. I really don't think a top-end (say) 3.5 should have to destroy a low-end 3.5 -1 and -1. That process, in and of itself, sets up such vast differences within each NTRP.
Another excellent point. IMHO, accurate rating systems give more weight to "meaningful" matches/games and whether you blow out a much weaker opponent by enough or not should not be a significant factor as matches against these much weaker (or much stronger) opponents are likely not as meaningful. However, that also may make it harder for the lower level player to improve their rating appropriately when they have a competitive loss against a much higher rated player. It is hard to have a perfect system
schmke is offline   Reply With Quote