Posts:
141
Registered:
Feb 29, 2004
From:
the land of smelly cheese
Age:
38
Re: leaderboard
Posted:
Sep 17, 2008, 7:46 AM
My view on the P1 advantage:
- it's only an advantage if both players are equal in skill and play perfectly every single move.
In real life, most people aren't equal in skill, and are very likely to make mistakes. This is why, for example, Richard, Zoey and Karl still manage to win most of the games they play as P2 against 90% of opponents.
- the P1 advantage is addressed by G-Pente and D-Pente in very valid - if different - ways.
How many people bother playing those variants? It seems to me that most people love the simplicity and fun that normal Pente rules provide. The P1 advantage is only an issue for the highest skilled players, in my view, and if they are that bothered by it, they should play the more balanced variants.
Posts:
2,220
Registered:
Mar 4, 2007
From:
San Francisco
Age:
45 Home page
Re: leaderboard
Posted:
Sep 17, 2008, 9:02 AM
Lepews- >The P1 advantage is only an issue for the highest >skilled players, in my view, and if they are that >bothered by it, they should play the more balanced >variants.
yeah, or make it set based,....
And,..just currious,....i see alot of people asking for set based,....
Is there any one out there that doesnt want set based???,..
I can't recall any one saying they didnt like the idea right off the top of my head.
Message was edited by: zoeyk at Sep 17, 2008 3:02 AM
Scire hostis animum - Intelligere ludum - Nosce te ipsum - Prima moventur conciliat - Nolite errare
Posts:
141
Registered:
Feb 29, 2004
From:
the land of smelly cheese
Age:
38
Re: leaderboard
Posted:
Sep 17, 2008, 10:08 AM
I think everyone's up for the set-based way of keeping score, but if I remember right Peter has said that such a change would involve wiping all scores and starting afresh, which not everyone may agree to..
Posts:
2,220
Registered:
Mar 4, 2007
From:
San Francisco
Age:
45 Home page
Re: leaderboard
Posted:
Sep 17, 2008, 10:55 AM
Lets Put It To A Vote.
I say we put up a thread to officially vote on it.
i am very ready to have our scores wiped out and start from scratch for the purpose of Set Based implementation.
it will be painful for some at first,..but the ends will justify the means.
gotta crack a few eggs to make an omelette.
in addition,..i think it would be good to have a data base of Pre-wipe out. so we can allways view the past players ranks in a historical sence. so that we dont actually lose anything in the way of data collected over the last decade.
just a thought.
Message was edited by: zoeyk at Sep 17, 2008 5:12 AM
Scire hostis animum - Intelligere ludum - Nosce te ipsum - Prima moventur conciliat - Nolite errare
I'm personally against a complete wipe in favor of set-based scores--it would be chaotic to say the least during the first couple weeks while people build up enough games to become ranked again, and those who come back after a hiatus would be completely shocked. While I have some personal doubts about the effectiveness of set-based scoring, if it were to be implemented I'd suggest easing into it. You'd tally set-based rating alongside single game rating, and calculate both at the same time. After a month or longer, keep calculating single-game ratings, but make set-based ratings the first rating displayed. It's a nasty thing to spring a total ratings wipe on people, so I think a transition is necessary.
Posts:
1,032
Registered:
Dec 16, 2001
From:
Powell, OH
Age:
37 Home page
Re: leaderboard
Posted:
Sep 17, 2008, 5:33 PM
I agree that set-based seems like the way to go. I know some people are still against it just because they think other tweaks to the ratings formula would work, or they feel that a lower ranked player should be rewarded for splitting a set with a higher ranked player.
I might have said ratings would be reset in the past, but I don't feel that way now. Just keep ratings the same and implement sets. Its not perfect but nothing would be when switching to a new ratings system.
Of course having sets in live games introduces a few more problems, like mid-set ditchers. I figure one way to handle that is to keep track of when players do that, and display that as part of a player's profile. At least then other players can see that before starting a set.
I wish we had a voting system, or polls in the forums for this sort of thing, would be interesting!
I am glad to see my points being discussed. Watsu, you are right that instead of a "swap" between yellows and reds it will be more of a "levelling out," and you provided some reasons for why that might be a good thing, but here is my question: Didn't the reds get higher ratings than the yellows for a reason? (Hopefully, yes.) I know I'm going to take heat for appearing to be a "point-hog," but if a player has worked hard to bring their rating up to red (and it is much much harder to do that in pente than in, say, chess, mainly due to the P1 advantage), wouldn't it be a little cruel to force a levelling off with those that they worked to outstrip?
Partica makes the valid point that these reds aren't forced to play, and they are free to choose between protecting their high rating and vying for the leaderboard, but I say why should they have to choose? What good is being the #1 or #2 player if there's an asterisk attached? And P, I have to respectfully disagree that a yellow splitting with a red is a victory for the yellow. In some circumstances, yes, but as a rule, the advantage gap trumps the skill gap, and all but the very best players (and I am sadly no longer one of those) will succumb to a skillfully executed "yellow-type" white, no matter how well they play.
Here is my quick-and-dirty approximation of what a black player's idealized "rating" will have to be to neutralize white's advantage:
Posts:
107
Registered:
Feb 17, 2008
From:
Edge of Space Home page
Re: leaderboard
Posted:
Sep 17, 2008, 7:36 PM
To address the point of reds having to choose between leaderboard vs ratings, the leaderboard (being argued for) is a frequent players' ladder, not synonymous with the monthly or all-time list.....it's a new category and simply put, if a player doesn't want to play more than once a month, then they shouldn't be in a tizzy about their name not being on it. Hell I never worry about not being the sexiest man in Hollywood..........I live in Colorado.
PS.... I vote for setbased if there's a tally to be taken.
Posts:
205
Registered:
Dec 16, 2001
From:
Moscow,Russia
Age:
56 Home page
Re: leaderboard
Posted:
Sep 17, 2008, 11:24 PM
I am N1 in rating but I am not specially play at DSG to be listed here as N1. I am playing when I have a time for that. Just for fun. I play at IYT and Brainking because in turn base games - you need not so much time. Playing DSG you need 1 hour or two, making move at turn base games you need 5 minutes. As for two games matches - I am against. You need two times more time to play. I often play at the morning when my doughter is sleeping, when she is weake up , I finish games, so ussially I start playing as P2, to be sure that if I finish round I give my opponent chance to win as P1 if it'll be only one game.
Posts:
2,220
Registered:
Mar 4, 2007
From:
San Francisco
Age:
45 Home page
Re: leaderboard
Posted:
Sep 18, 2008, 12:16 AM
well,.. although that is very honorable of you alex to play a single game as black, we can't expect others to follow the same thinking when in search of solutions for balance.
the set based is more for players that have the time to finish a set live. for those who want single games i think probably there will be a option for single games as well should the set based become a reality. but im just guessing and have no actual idea what the future holds as of course it is not my choice at all other than my voiced opinions. at which point we are having our cake and eating it too if both options are to become available.
in that instance the set based option would not effect your time lines as it would not be forced.
but we'll see.
~zoeyk
Scire hostis animum - Intelligere ludum - Nosce te ipsum - Prima moventur conciliat - Nolite errare
Posts:
751
Registered:
Mar 1, 2002
From:
My Own Lil World Mostly
Age:
43
Re: leaderboard
Posted:
Sep 18, 2008, 2:53 AM
Everyone I know is for set-based ratings BUT I also do not know everyone. Make sense? haha
It is most difficult to please everyone, especially given the differing reasons for playing the game. Some do it for ratings, others for fun.
I wonder if there could be two Rooms/Lobbies. One for Serious Players that is limited to setbased ratings and another for Play for Fun Players that is open to whatever game options they choose. I also know this would require some major coding efforts on Peters part and require him to update the Ratings/Rankings page with parameters/columns for both sets of ratings, the Table Creation process to include those same parameters and the different Rooms to limit/allow the parameters. We must ask ourselves, is it really worth it?
The world is full of diversity. I personally would like to see Peter decide how he would like his site to be and take the issue out of the opinonated pente world. haha
And I say all this after giving my opinions all over the forums! haha How daring! Well, no, not really, but definitely human. Please don't take offense on the statement "take the issue out of the opinionated pente world". I am kidding around to a point. I have seen these same discussions since I began playing here and I have as of yet to see a resolution that would make all parties "happy". Okay, um, yeah!
Posts:
107
Registered:
Feb 17, 2008
From:
Edge of Space Home page
Re: leaderboard
Posted:
Sep 18, 2008, 2:55 AM
Anyone else find it daunting that this is sandbox time for Nosovs? LOL While the rest of us pinheads are scrambling to win a set between ourselves he's over in Russia playing Barbie with his daughter while he trounces the rest of us with the other half of his brain. I surrender. Think I'll go play Marco Polo with myself in the shower......something with a more likely outcome of me winning something anyway.
Posts:
751
Registered:
Mar 1, 2002
From:
My Own Lil World Mostly
Age:
43
Re: leaderboard
Posted:
Sep 18, 2008, 3:14 AM
Karl, I thank you much for being respectful and after reading your all of your statements thoroughly, can better see your perspective and understand where you are coming from. I can also see the other side. We are from 2 different camps, so to speak, and that is okay. I respect your opinions and I hope you respect mine.
I remember when you first started...I remember when most of the current reds/yellows first started, I did say MOST, and I can remember teaching them what I knew by playing them and pointing out mistakes and the available tools to help improve skill, and offering up my knowledge and points in the name of building the community.
I can also remember feeling good about my efforts. Just as you feel good about the efforts you put out to gain your Red status.
To answer the question you posed "why should they have to choose?", because (to me) that is what life is about, choices. The choices we make today affect our tomorrow. I can pose the same type of question: "Why do I not have a choice?"
We don't want to limit the players on DSG to just the serious and we don't want to limit the playing to just the Play for Fun players.
Karl, Let me just say that I'm not actually in favor of a leveling out between yellows and reds, I'm actually opposed to it and actually would like to see the opposite occur. However, the silver lining to such an effect might have been to spur a change in the way ratings are calculated. Since that looks to be happening regardless of how the leaderboard issue resolves, I don't think a levelling out between yellows and reds would be at all beneficial. I do think a weekly leaderboard (in addition to the standard active player rankings) might be beneficial for the site. Sorry that my position on that didn't come across more clearly.
Retired from TB Pente, but still playing live games & exploring variants like D, poof and boat
Posts:
55
Registered:
Jan 21, 2002
From:
ohio
Age:
65
Re: leaderboard
Posted:
Sep 19, 2008, 4:44 AM
WOW i'd hate to see my 10000 gms wiped but if it must be.... i'm for set-based anyhow, however, i do believe all SETS should be rated. if a red wishes to stay on the leaderboard{weekly} he should only play other reds and not bother us other colors. whats the problem?
