Yes, it turned out to be a bit silly. We didn't bring anything new. We just added an extra formula. But it really does reduce the likelihood of errors like getting first place in one day and second place after a thousand days. Maybe we can develop this idea further?
So, if you are adopting the oscillator, you shouldn’t think about random breaks. This sometimes happens, but it won’t affect the final calculation…
Take the calculator that I suggested and conduct an experiment. Second place will always be rewarded with at least 50 points, regardless of any break from the leader, while the rest will receive scores evenly distributed from 0 to 50.
Added after 9 minutes
Here, tell me more about this: tournament rating, current rating, cyclic rating, and annual rating. This is needed so that we can speak the "same" language.
/topic/at/60314/
Perhaps before answering a question from anyone who asks, I should first ask them, “Have you really read everything that was said in this thread?” :)
