Today I was thinking, and it seems to me that we are going in the wrong direction. The rating needs to be calculated differently. First, the place should be taken into account, as in any sport,
I've already shown 100 times that there is no place for POSITION in my rating because the game lasts for DAYS, it's about speed, but it's not impossible that a turtle will take first place, then the entire rating in the summary table will be skewed, and all because there were no strong players in the tournament.
regardless of the result. Secondly, the leader's result in the tournament itself does not show anything. You can't say that the winner is a cool player or that he was just lucky.
It's interesting what rating they will come up with if, in the next race, other runners run it in a few seconds. Stop wasting time :) You will never introduce a rating system :)
It's better to calculate from the last place in the tournament, giving some minimum points for it. Introduce a progressive system of adding points so that the number of added points increases with the place. I'll think about how this can be implemented.
the first of them will have an amazing rating. And in another tournament, 6 cheetahs played. As a result, according to the rating, the turtle is in first place in the summary rating table! :)
Maybe all this is nonsense, but something needs to be suggested, otherwise we are in a vicious circle.