Skip to content

Tournaments and player rating.

User Avatar
#43
Auto-translated
LuckyF
The rating won't be objective if it's based solely on tournament matches; there are too few tournaments, they take too long, and they often include various specific rules.
Well, take tournaments from the last 5 years, or 10 – wouldn't that be enough games? Experimental and specific ones shouldn't be counted, as anything can happen there.
LuckyF
And regarding the top 10, I don't know about Javdet, but, no offense to Ivy, he plays well, but objectively, he's not in the top 10.
Well, it's Heroes, so you can't achieve 100% objectivity with any rating, but 35th place is probably temporarily underestimated, to put it in Kostya's words :)
LuckyF
And just out of curiosity, who do you think, from the current top 10 or even the top 13, could reliably beat Ivy and Javdet in a match?
I don't know, I'm not a bookmaker :) And I'm not saying that today's rating is garbage; it's more or less objective, but it has many inaccuracies; the problem is that the system allows them.
LuckyF
In football, there's a round-robin system with many games for everyone against everyone; here, tournaments are a small group of 4-6 people with completely different skill levels, and then there's a playoff, often in a best-of-one format, where, due to the randomness of heroes, even the objectively stronger player can lose that one game.
You're trying to calculate the rating based on a single tournament again; in short, people have been playing Heroes for a long time :smile01:
LuckyF
Or, objectively, the 2nd strongest player could immediately face the 1st. And if the person plays all the tournaments throughout the year, that's fine.
But with the current system, you still have to try to get the 2nd strongest player to face the 1st (just kidding :))
LuckyF
And how do you evaluate those who play only 1-2 tournaments a year?
And now, this difference is many times greater; some people win 100 games in a season, while others win 5.