Player rating for tournaments across all installments of Heroes.

I already told you that you're a great clown - those are always in style.

I apologize to Dmitry AS and the forum members, but I am still forced to comment on this post from Dmitry AC. Who among us is the bigger clown - it's not for you to decide - each will decide that for themselves. Agreed? I will speak to the substance of the matter in the post below.

So to speak, you create a favorable environment for others. Others find it funny. Life isn't as boring with you.

:) And I love it when others are having fun - I can be funny too ;) But that doesn't mean I don't understand what I'm doing.

Sage, please provide a couple more examples of a similar
rating calculation system from sports (specifically for the "athlete") - otherwise he won't rest until he gets a good kick in the rear.

He has already provided enough examples for an "athlete" like you. However, is a kick in the rear not enough for you? So what is it that you want?

Your reactions to my examples in the style of "whatever" are very informative. Well then, time waits for no one, your turn on the arena... The circus applauds!

Let it applaud - I don't mind. However, as I already said - your arguments don't even descend TO "whatever" :)

Judging by the drop in morale - I'm not the only one who doesn't like this circus. Well, not all is lost yet. Perhaps the administration will remind us of the forum rules.

I understand that your only hope is the administration - that they'll drop all the posts :) However, I copy some of them :) And I'm not offended by the drop in morale, although I'm very surprised that Sage lowered it for me - that's a rarity :) Apparently, the man acted out of good intentions and I understand him and am not offended.

Getting closer to the point:

Well, let's see what Guy de Maupassant says about ratings :)

The rating system proposed by IronAxe is undoubtedly suitable for summarizing the results of one specific tournament.

One specific tournament? :) Any system would be suitable for that, and you wrote this in your posts above :) But it's also suitable for the Kanigem tournament - which Sage mentions. And Dmitry AS is actually saying this now too - thank the Gods! :) So let's settle on a system for calculating the General rating for players in ongoing forum tournaments that meet the quorum.

It is not suitable for calculating several tournaments, and its own creator stated this.

Dmitry, this is simply ridiculous!!! If I stated this - then please provide the community with the thread and post number where I stated it??? :) I stated precisely that a system which considers only PLACE is absolutely unsuitable for this :) And in general, ANY system that considers PLACE is unsuitable for this. I admit this and that's where we stand!

If one summarizes several tournaments, a flaw can be discovered: namely, by considering the difference in results between tournament participants over several tournaments, we take on the obligation that:
- maps in these tournaments were the same size, which is, in principle, impossible even within
one version of the game, not to mention "mixed" stages of the Van Kanigem memorial.
- maps in these tournaments had the same density, which is also impossible.
- the tournament task within one version of Heroes was the same.
As we can see, it is fundamentally impossible to create an ideal situation to ensure players have equal opportunities to "pull up" their rating. That is, in each tournament, players have different potential opportunities to create a "difference," given the same equal investment of strength and effort from each of them. Consequently, when considering the difference in results, one player
can pull so far ahead of the pursuers on that map (tournament) where such an opportunity was actually provided, that they will be unreachable despite all the competitors' desires to catch up. The competitiveness is lost.

Let Sage comment on all this. I don't want to get personal and receive a rep minus from this person whom I respect!

Take the multi-event (track and field) mentioned by Sage. In each of the competitions, a balanced system
of rewarding athletes per unit of result is adopted. That is, every meter or second of result is multiplied by a coefficient
calculated empirically. Such a system allows athletes to compete until the last event to determine the winner. That is,
at each subsequent stage of the multi-event, athletes have equal chances to improve their point total
compared to the previous one. And even if you introduced a standard unit of measurement in the Van Kanigem tournaments (days), different versions
of Heroes create that very muddle that would arise when considering the difference in results. If there are several such same-measurement systems (days, skeletons, experience), it doesn't reduce subjectivism either, since the opportunities for result differences when completing speedruns in days, skeleton collection, or experience - are absolutely different.
This is a significant flaw, much more significant than the "freebie" rating you mentioned, which my proposed system supposedly gives. No freebies: take a place - get rating points. Again, the difference in results can only be applied to a specific tournament. But if it's not needed to create an overall rating picture,
then why create confusion? Take a multi-day cycling race. A huge distance (around 1000-1500 m.) is divided into stages. The difference in results at the end of the stage goes into the general standings. At the new stage, athletes start again as one big group. That is, speaking in Heroes' language - it's like completing one large campaign in Heroes. Something similar can be seen in a leader-chase race tournament. But there are still the same "buts." Essentially, a multi-day race is one long road divided into stages. You get on the bike and pedal, earning yourself a lead.
Everything is straightforward. In Heroes, however, the game version itself, different maps, and different tournament tasks turn the general rating—if result differences are considered—into such a hodgepodge that no one will like it. Therefore, there is only one way out: when calculating both individual tournaments and the general rating based on several off-line tournaments, consider only the place taken. The main thing is to preserve the principle of competitiveness, which I have mentioned repeatedly. To somehow neutralize the difference in player class (this same class affects the "freebie rating," according to your claims), it is necessary to hold qualifying tournaments and create several leagues, as you correctly noted is not currently possible. So for now, we make do with what we have.

Dmitry - how did you put it? Writing a lot doesn't mean anything. In the posts below, Sage answered you briefly and to the point :) I won't even try to explain anything to you or anyone else, because you would interpret it as IronAxe, the creator of his system, praising himself :) You also claim that I find no support for my system from forum members. Well, of course? :) However, at the same time, I don't see anyone, not even one person, supporting you incredibly. Worth thinking about, isn't it?
PS. By the way, right now I'm quite tipsy :) Tomorrow morning I'm heading out fishing with buddies and girlfriends. I'll be back Monday evening, but I'll probably only start thinking straight closer to the end of next week. I hope that in this time you, Dmitry AS, will post a description of your system on the forum, which would reflect player ratings better than my system and yet consider only the place taken by the player in the tournament in its formulas! ;)

Added after 24 minutes
PS. Well, I promised to speak to the substance:
Dmitry AS wrote:
The rating system proposed by IronAxe is undoubtedly suitable for summarizing the results of one specific tournament.
Sage wrote:
P.S. Both your system and Iron's system have flaws, which have already been discussed enough. But Iron's system still more accurately reflects the skill of players participating in tournaments.
AmberSoler wrote—though that was a long time ago and I haven't seen him in these rating discussions since then—well, a man said it, a man keeps his word ;) And I will quote his statement once more - he actually gave me direct permission to use this statement for my own purposes! Here it is:
-------------
I think it's not worth overcomplicating.
All possible calculation options that take place (or similar parameters) into account end up being quite cumbersome, difficult to understand intuitively, and inconvenient to work with. Essentially, Iron's option is the optimum in terms of simplicity, clarity, and relative accuracy. If we assume that an average tournament doesn't have huge gaps by the leader, then provided you abandon "place," this method can be kept as a working one...
No "simple" modifications can be tacked onto this calculation variant, because we immediately move toward the same problems we want to avoid.
--------------

Should I provide any more comments on this, if I've already once backed down and agreed in principle with Kamikaze's system (although I consider it flawed) only because many forum members like the rating to account not only for the result but also the place taken by the player in the tournament? However, in my humble opinion, I believe that accounting for PLACE in rating systems SPECIFICALLY for off-line Heroes tournaments is INCORRECT. At the same time, I consider this correct in professional sports, where qualifying competitions exist and therefore we see a more or less equal composition of participants at tournaments. I don't know how to explain this even more loyally and detailedly to Dmitry AS. But if this fellow allows himself not entirely correct jabs in my direction, he will get something in his rep :) not a minus :) but an adequate response to his post - a response in the style of NY from IronAXE. Dmitry AS, don't forget about AXE advertising - the effect is stunning :) Though I haven't drunk cologne since the army :) In my understanding, AXE is an Axe (Hatchet). And many Greenpeace activists have already pressed me :) It's useless!
Therefore, Carthage must be destroyed! ;)