On-line rating (discussion)

Many thanks to Pit - for the sake of LM!!!
His tables reflect the real strength of the players much better than the CC-D table. And therefore, it exposes its shortcomings... The rating, in my opinion, needs to be changed...
I also support the idea of Leagues.

I agree, everything is correct, but now let's talk about reality.
1. Discussions are just discussions; everyone understands that nothing is perfect, but no solutions have been proposed yet.
2. The percentage ratio is correct, but there are many nuances in this - it's a very complex calculation (if you understand what I mean). It's not just about counting who won more games against the top ten - but how do you determine this top ten, how do you link the percentage and the place that doesn't exist yet - because the percentage will change depending on this game, and so on. It's difficult to think through. Whoever comes up with it will be great, but of course, they will again try to make it simpler, so it's easier, and again, it won't be perfect, plus don't forget that you also need to write a program for all this.
No one will calculate this on a piece of paper; have you tried? (I have).
3. Here's a solution regarding the rating:
- what exists now will be like statistics, and at the end of the season, when all the games are played, you can calculate the percentage and determine the winner. It's a fresh idea.:smile44:

And what comes out of all this discussion is that it's no longer profitable to play against weak players, and they may simply not want to because of the rules, which is a minus. But if you want to play against a strong player...
Regarding the league, it's already like a tournament.
Dividing players into those who are not immediately competing for victory - beginners - is not correct (for example, Scorp - he only started playing quantitatively in the season when he won, and he practically didn't play in the winter, and if there were rules like the proposed one, he wouldn't have won, there wouldn't have been access to compete for 1st place), and in general, there are many nuances here.
Let's discuss and discuss.