Why do we accept this system when other systems like chess elo are already proven to be better?
A. Chess ElO is 100 percent free. Can see anyone’s ElO for free. Can even see all of your own analytics for free. In great detail.
B. If you have a chess victory, you know exactly what you will get. It isn’t a secret. You put in the work to get that victory. It shouldn’t matter if past opponents played poorly, so now you don’t get credit?
C. If you beat a higher ranked player you get credit. Would be ridiculous to say 2 chess players played a match, the better player lost, but he “must have been sick or had a bad day” so the result won’t count at all!
D. You aren’t given chess elo points because others improved you played months ago. Would be ridiculous to study, read, train at chess, play hundreds of games, and then notice someone who hasn’t done any of that somehow had their Elo raise magically on its own more than yours.
E. Chess Elo works amazingly well. The system can't be gamed.
F. Chess Eli you get credit for a victory within a millisecond. There is no “well thanks for playing. Now wait for a day, weeks, or maybe months , or maybe that win won’t help you at all.
G. Chess is a game of win, lose, or draw. Tennis is win or lose. The ELO system doesn’t say “well, you lost 7 pawns and a rook so that victory doesn’t count as much now You have to win by not losing any pieces “, which would totally change the game in itself.
H. Since you know what you will get, there is no chance of backend computer glitches owned by a single company that will affect your ELO. Isn’t transparency nice? Would be strange to play 20’chess games then just wait and see what happens to your rating for weeks or months. Then wonder why a computer is saying those victories aren’t meaningful, or too meaningful, and never really know what the computer expects you to actually do.
I. Chess elo also works across all ages and genders. Doesn’t matter if you are male, female, 5 or 95.
J. If you are losing a chess match, and quit, it doesn’t protect your ELO. That would be ridiculous. You don’t say “well I have a headache, so I will quit to protect my elo”. Sure you can quit, but you lose the points. Why should the victor not get any credit because you were losing and quit? Amazing how many kids have a sore leg once they start to lose. Which means you get your best victory just taken away from you (that month or every two weeks) and it won’t count.
Are we all following a number blindly because we are told to? Or are these differences existing with the UTR “modified El0” to get people to pay for it and make more money?
Yes, people say “it’s the best we have”, but why does it have to be that complex? Why not a simple, straight forward ELO system like chess has that is proven to work?