Re: [pbmserv-dev] ratings

[Lyman Hurd <lhurd@yahoo.com>]

I have discovered that when you get them old enough
you can get the kids to PLAY abstract games with you
(voila two endeavors for the price of one :-)).

I had to ask, what specific deficiencies of the old
ratings system is the new system supposed to address?

I know that there has been an open thread on team
games and multiplayer games and how to rate them
fairly.  Is there concern that there are specific
instabilities in the current system?

Of course all ordering systems assume transitivity
which does not always hold.  Also ones performance
against near and far rankings may be markedly
different (when I first learned go I learned from a 6
dan.  For quite a while I played much stronger against
really strong players (with appropriate handicap) than
against ones nearer my level (not knowing how to
capitalize on mistakes my teacher never made :-)).

I have found the page that describes the new formulas
and was just curious (I have a longstanding interest
in dynamical systems that makes this sort of
investigation irresistible!).

Cheers,

Lyman

--- Richard Rognlie <rrognlie@gamerz.net> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 22, 2002 at 01:05:19PM -0700, Scott
> Huddleston wrote:
> > Richard,
> > 
> > Thanks for the update.  I'm just curious, not
> trying to dun.
> > 
> > Can you give some general ideas about what the new
> rating system
> > might eventually be?  Would it mainly entail
> changes to the rating
> > system, changes in code architecture, or both?
> 
> The new system is FIBS (first internet backgammon
> server) based.
> it's "real" (vs. integer).    And the issue is
> serious changes to
> the code architecture.  Essentially, I need to move
> all the rating 
> from it's own class to a "part" of the Game class,
> so it can be 
> inherited by each game engine.
> 
> 
> > The "raise the kids" game has its share of fun too
> :-)
> 
> I've got them today (while my wife is at a baby
> shower... we're having
> fun laughing at the dog...  (he's being silly for
> some reason...)
> 
>     http://www.gamerz.net/rrognlie/images/Hairy/
> 
> He's a big hairy dog.. hence the name.  a little
> over 4.. acting like
> a pupppy today.
> 
> > Thanks,
> > - Scott
> > 
> > >The answer is... I've never figured out a good
> way to convert the
> > >existing pbmserv rating code to a per game
> mechanism that is inheritable
> > >by class.  
> > >
> > >It needs work on my part... yep yep yep.  I
> dropped the ball...
> > >
> > >*years* ago.
> > >
> > >I'd been hoping to work on it during my summary
> vacation this year
> > >but it seems my wife thinks I should help with
> the kids...  go figure.
> > >
> > >8^)
> > >
> > >On Sun, Sep 22, 2002 at 12:32:25PM -0700, Scott
> Huddleston wrote:
> > >> 
> > >> On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, John Williams wrote:
> > >> >I finally found out what happened to the
> fabled "new rating system" which
> > >> >was going to be integrated in at one point,
> but I have not looked at it to
> > >> >determine whether it supports joint wins, or
> how much work is left to make
> > >> >it work at all.
> > >> 
> > >> John,
> > >> 
> > >> What IS the story with the fabled "new rating
> system" that never appeared?
> > >> 
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> - Scott
> > 
> > 
> > To unsubscribe, send a message to
> esquire@gamerz.net with
> > 	unsubscribe pbmserv-dev@gamerz.net
> > as the BODY of the message.  The SUBJECT is
> ignored.
> > 
> 
> -- 
>  /  \__  | Richard Rognlie / Sendmail Ninja /
> Gamerz.NET Lackey
>  \__/  \ | http://www.gamerz.net/rrognlie/   
> <rrognlie@gamerz.net>
>  /  \__/ | No trees were killed in the sending of
> this message. 
>  \__/    | However, a great many instructions were
> executed.
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe, send a message to esquire@gamerz.net
> with
> 	unsubscribe pbmserv-dev@gamerz.net
> as the BODY of the message.  The SUBJECT is ignored.
> 


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
http://sbc.yahoo.com