Kinks
Joined: Feb 28, 2007
|
 Posted:
Jan 26, 2023 - 04:18 |
 
|
I read Christer's post about the new system and have to say it seems like a good idea. However, the coaches "rank" (Star, Super Star, Legend, etc) is also linked to the new system. I don't find this very helpful at all. Quite the opposite, it seems to be very misleading.
Don't get me wrong, the rank was only ever a rough guide as to a coaches skill level and the flaws have been discussed in depth. However, the new rank seems completely meaningless in most cases. I think the new CR should be used for a coaches CR, but the old system for their rank.
Is it just me? |
_________________
Better lucky than good |
|
Nelphine
Joined: Apr 01, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jan 26, 2023 - 04:53 |
|
I'm confused.
What about the system is misleading? Is it because some coaches haven't yet played much (or at all) in 2020 and so are ranked lower than they 'should' be based on their previous rank? |
|
|
Kinks
Joined: Feb 28, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 26, 2023 - 06:02 |
|
The fact that people who haven't been active in C/B recently are ranked lower than their actual skill level. e.g. Purplegoo is a rookie and PurpleChest is an emerging star. They've both plaid plenty of 2020 |
_________________
Better lucky than good |
|
Nelphine
Joined: Apr 01, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jan 26, 2023 - 06:31 |
|
Right but.. that happened with the old system too. Anyone who played primarily league (or even just on other mediums), and then joined majors, had exactly the same phenomenon happen to them. |
|
|
Kinks
Joined: Feb 28, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 26, 2023 - 08:17 |
|
Yeh, it certain was a problem before. It seems to be a much bigger problem now. Previously I would say a players ranking was mostly right (i.e. a good guide to a coaches skill level), now I would say the opposite, it seems to be mostly wrong. |
_________________
Better lucky than good |
|
C0ddlefish
Joined: Sep 17, 2019
|
| Posted:
Jan 26, 2023 - 11:09 |
|
Edit: seems to be ok now |
Last edited by C0ddlefish on Jan 26, 2023; edited 1 time in total |
|
ClayInfinity
Joined: Aug 15, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 26, 2023 - 11:10 |
|
| Kinks wrote: | | The fact that people who haven't been active in C/B recently are ranked lower than their actual skill level. e.g. Purplegoo is a rookie and PurpleChest is an emerging star. They've both plaid plenty of 2020 |
Wasnt this new ranking entirely because people like Purplegoo were #1 for years but never played (or rarely played) and hence a ranking reduction for inactivity was required...
So, in short Purplegoo needs to play and reclaim his mantle |
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 26, 2023 - 11:17 |
|
I think the new ranking is a good thing. If CR is your thing (and it’s OK if it is), I can see why you’d be fed up that a couple of highly ranked coaches were not playing much. I have not played 5 matches yet in C, so I’m a Rookie in the new system. Seems fair enough to me.
My very limited understanding of Glicko from when we bought it in for the NAF is that it’s more reactive in ‘placing’ a coach than Elo. So, if that theory holds, it’s probably only a 40 or 50 game job to climb to the front page, if one deserves to be there. No big deal, if that’s what you want to do.
I had made a resolution to play more in C this year. Two games in 26 days is pretty good for me, going in the right direction!  |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 26, 2023 - 11:49 |
|
About the new system: I find weird that if you are top 1 in the Box you are not automatically Legend, because you need to have, if I'm not wrong, 1850 CR.
It's harder to have 1850 in Box than in Competitive, maybe because fewer coaches play there or due to other factors.
Last time I checked Box rankings, Joost and I were top 1 and top 2, and both of us were Super Stars.
That said, the Glicko 2 is way better than the old system. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 26, 2023 - 12:13 |
|
Maybe some other ranking or honours system would be cool. Especially now that the rankings have been reset and decay.
Some coaches are not going to attempt to regain or maintain a high ranking under the new system.
I think that it would be better for the fluff of the site if coaches with e.g. multiple Majors wins had some rank other than Rookie or Emerging Star.
E.g Majors wins could appear as trophies on a coach's homepage. |
_________________
Open [L]eague Tournaments - NOW recruiting!! Old/New style skill progression! - Secret League - All Stars! |
|
Macavity
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 26, 2023 - 17:24 |
|
I think that I am obviously the best coach ever, but am hampered by my constant need to hamper myself.
But I feel little need to modify the site around my way of seeing things. |
_________________
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -C.S. Lewis |
|
Lorebass
Joined: Jun 25, 2010
|
| Macavity wrote: | I think that I am obviously the best coach ever, but am hampered by my constant need to hamper myself.
But I feel little need to modify the site around my way of seeing things. |
Approved |
|
|
ArrestedDevelopment
Joined: Sep 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
Jan 26, 2023 - 19:11 |
|
This is just a necessary side effect of a movement to a system that is separate from ELO and measuring within a new division.
Any ranking is going to be "relatively" meaningless until the requisite number of games are lodged (both for the individual and for the total).
Tying the ranking to the old ELO-based system throws up all the old problems as well as a few new ones.
CR isn't purely a measure of skill. The ranking isn't actually a measure of one's ability at blood bowl (though it is assuredly related to it). I understand the issue you have, and I can assure you it almost certainly isn't just you that is a bit confused by the way things stand, but it kind of arises out of a mis-attributation of what CR is (for).
To relate to the already referenced (with apologies) - Purplegoo is a rookie because CR isn't trying to tell you how good he is at Blood Bowl. It's (currently) trying to present an assessment of the games he's played within the C division. And with less than 5 games played within it he is, like me, a rookie within that realm. |
_________________
 |
|
Joost
Joined: Mar 17, 2014
|
| Posted:
Jan 26, 2023 - 20:41 |
|
I think AD's explanation on the new CR is spot on. It's just the labels that don't currently match that uncertainty. So take with a grain of salt for now. I do think it might fail to identify coaches of non-average ability in either direction, but labels at the top or bottom should be more accurate (since you need to play a fair number of games to get there). I also like the use of standard deviations as the way to establish cut offs for the labels. 3.5 std (I believe Christer mentioned that) is a pretty high bar I think, and I expect the "Legend" label will be applied to very few players at any given moment. |
|
|
Kinks
Joined: Feb 28, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 26, 2023 - 21:33 |
|
Maybe I've misunderstood, but I thought the old data was being used under the new formula. That would seem to be the case as everyone's CR wasn't reset.
So I don't think the issue is a lack of data. I like that CR decays, to keep things fresh. However, I think that the new CR calculation is linked to a coaches title is misleading. |
_________________
Better lucky than good |
|
|
|
S2 of PEBBL
Search
