The rating system first appeared on our forum in the winter season of 2007-08. I calculated it using SS-D's formula. The discussion took place in this thread.
In early 2009, StickyFingaz proposed a different system for calculating the rating, which many forum members believed more objectively reflected the players' skill level during the season. It was also suggested that the rating should not be reset at the end of the season.
A vote was held, and since mid-2009, ratings (seasonal and permanent) have been calculated using StickyFingaz's formula.
rating is certainly a good thing, but it doesn't reflect the real situation.
For example, based on the last 5 seasons, winning requires scoring at least 150-180 points, which means having an undefeated streak of at least 15 wins against opponents from the top of the table, i.e., playing and winning 1-2 games per week. Our winners played between 23 and 49 games in a season – consistently 2-4 games per week. Not everyone has that much time for games.
There are two ways to win the season: either defeat strong players who are at the top of the table (which requires fewer games), or rely on quantity and play against newcomers (this method is called "padding the rating with noobs" and is not respected among players).
Here is a quote from March 11, 2009:
The alternative rating is not yet objective. Only recently has the process of clearly identifying strong and weak players, as well as the "middle class," begun. In my opinion, it will become objective by early summer when more games have been played. And the more games that are played, the more objective this rating will be. Therefore, I think it should never be reset.
Tables starting from the winter season of 2007-08, sorted by seasonal rating, can be found here.