Calculating the rating for clans!

I hope I answered all your questions?
Sincerely.

Sure. There will be a lot of tables this year. We'll probably have to divide the work. I'll try to calculate the ratings for all heroes using my system. AlexPank promised to check the oscillator and bonus coefficients. And you will calculate the clan rating in three variations based on these results. Okay. :)

Added 45 minutes ago

Hey, is anyone home? :) Because I don't see the point in the dialogue when you don't read what I'm writing...

Do you think I don't understand your digs? :) I see, hear, and comment on everything perfectly, as I have repeatedly shown you :)

At that specific moment, the results of six players were considered against each other. All other results - for example, yours - were extraneous and interfered. We were playing against each other. Duel: clan against clan. And only six numbers mattered - the results of the players mentioned in that post. And to prevent any extraneous results from creating interference (imbalance), it was decided to remove them from the analysis.

At the same time, no one prevented you from throwing out the unnecessary ones that did not participate in your duel and numbering the six players from 1st to 6th. But you didn't like it because it would create an imbalance. You said it yourself. But this situation with the places is considered a specific case, which can quite possibly occur when calculating the personal rating for each player, especially after several tournaments in a row, when someone was in one and absent in another. Accounting for places will also create an imbalance, just like the case you cited as an example!

You, however, refer to a rating that takes into account the results of ALL players who participated in the tournament... In this case, the imbalance will be not taking into account the results of the others...

But not all players can (meaning all in one tournament). And in another, some of the strong players may not show up, and players with inappropriate results in days will also take higher places, which does not correspond to their strength in terms of days. Do you want me to pull another example from that same topic for you?

Therefore, there is a substitution of concepts, caused by your misunderstanding of the situation that developed at that moment and discussed between the participants of the
clan confrontation. Moreover, this was a private decision within the framework of one private tournament. And this does not mean that such an approach should be applied to all in a row...

The substitution of concepts is not on my part. I have always said and will say that taking the place into account MAY create an imbalance when calculating the rating in the game, whatever it may be, for clans or players. And you said in one topic that places will create an imbalance, and in another topic you say something else, which is not logical :)

What I noticed. A considerable amount of time has passed since the end of our polemic. I deliberately refrain from commenting on the calculation of the rating, except in cases when you ask me questions, publishing excerpts from my posts on another case.

Are you telling me that? :) I remember someone pulled excerpts from my posts when you weren't even involved, I was already arguing with AlexPanko. I answered you in the same way. Moreover, the excerpt is relevant to the topic.

Nevertheless, you continue to look for justification for your method, apparently realizing its inadequacy. If you were completely confident in its validity, I think you would have stopped looking for justifications a long time ago... :D But, the fact remains!

The fact is that I am not looking for any justifications for my method, and I have not looked for them. You have already accepted it. The non-linear part is present in all your formulas :) I just said it directly and I will repeat it, that the oscillator introduces distortions, explicitly or implicitly, and makes mistakes when taking into account a parameter such as PLACE. Even AlexPanko's coefficient, refined, does not create as much imbalance as the linear component :)

To be honest, I was convinced that you would not use this childish trick of shifting the blame in a conversation, turning the opponent's words 180 degrees, without changing the essence... Alas! Everything is getting worse and worse...

Oh, were you convinced? :). You tried to provoke me with these statements.
And when I answered you adequately, you start... alas, everything is getting worse and worse... You yourself need to be at your best, then there will be no "alas".

P.s. Dear IronAxe, I ask you in the future not to comment on my words, pulling them out of context of any conversations in the past, due to the inability (confirmation - above) to understand their meaning.

Again, a hint about my stupidity when there are no other arguments. I understand more than you can handle :)

(This is not a personal attack! - I anticipate the statement - I am simply stating a fact). I have no time and, moreover, no desire to explain again what exactly I wanted to convey with my words in one situation or another.

Okay, it's not an attack. I also stated the fact that you say one thing and then another. And don't start saying that something completely different was being discussed there. Yeah, life on Mars was being discussed, or what? :) Keep in mind, this is not a personal attack, but facts!

Those who participated in that conversation understood everything. You did not participate - what is the point of getting involved? It was a private conversation between the participants of the clan duel, and my words did not apply to you... Right?;)

Well, yes :) I'm not saying that your words were personally about me there. They were about Days and Place. And you expressed yourself clearly enough there. And I understood everything no worse than others.

If you are going to write an answer, read it several times.

I will also advise you to read my posts three times, and slowly.

Because now there will be statements like "you are avoiding the conversation", "you do not want to prove your point", "you do not see the mistakes that I showed you"... And so on. You are too predictable.

I am predictable because you are predictable too :)

P.p.s. If you do not answer this post of mine, I will be grateful to you... I'm tired of the chatter.

I think you should be doubly grateful to me for not ignoring your post :)