IronAxe
Auto-translated
I already told you that your calculations are correct. However, I believe your interpretation is incorrect. We are not arguing about the correctness of rearranging numbers and coefficients, but about the validity of considering the player's position.
You say that the position doesn't matter. I say it does. How else can I show this with numbers? It's already evident from our calculations. You don't want the position to have an impact and are surprised why my calculations give half the rating to the underdog and slightly increase it for those higher in the table. What's so surprising about that if that was the goal when writing the oscillator – the higher the position, the more significant the bonus...
What example should I provide in Excel? What?
I'm talking about logic and the common sense of evaluating a player's result, not about numbers.
What's wrong with the logic of my system? It doesn't need any additional bonuses for either the LEADERS or the Underdogs. Everything is already perfect there :) Or is it unclear who the leader is and who the underdog is? Ha-ha, twice.
Explain to Izual logically why he is rapidly falling behind in the wrong direction. Explain to Radik why his Mazai gains 10 rating points with a 10% aging rate. Show me in an Excel table, using my system and your hypothetical major situation, the same illogical situations that you claim exist in my system.