PDA

View Full Version : what?!



bunta
13-09-2005, 12:12 PM
OK, the new NSWJCL magazine is out. my rating only went up by 30+ which is so.. i don't get how the rating system works, i beat about 5x 600 rated guys and lots of higher 500 rated guys, where my rating was 506. Joshua Lau lost to me, his rating was 664 now its 726,
why did mine go up so less?!

Trent Parker
13-09-2005, 01:17 PM
What was your rating before and what is it now?

bunta
13-09-2005, 01:59 PM
What was your rating before and what is it now?

it was 506, now its 536, i thought my rating wouldve been at least 600

antichrist
13-09-2005, 03:13 PM
it was 506, now its 536, i thought my rating wouldve been at least 600

Bunta, as I have stated elsewhere, I thought there was a glitch in JCL ratings, that was 5 years ago but so not really relevant.

bunta
13-09-2005, 03:46 PM
Bunta, as I have stated elsewhere, I thought there was a glitch in JCL ratings, that was 5 years ago but so not really relevant.

what do you mean

antichrist
13-09-2005, 06:30 PM
They should look at the earlier case for sure to see that there are not faults in their system.

Have a quick look at yours also to see if it needs further investigation.

Just make sure that you have not forgot a bad comp.

I suppose you can email a request to recheck your ratings.

Trent Parker
13-09-2005, 10:28 PM
Bunta all these players rated slightly higher than you would have only increased your rating by tiny bits. You may have beated Joshua Lau but who did he beat in that rating period?

bunta
13-09-2005, 11:48 PM
Bunta all these players rated slightly higher than you would have only increased your rating by tiny bits. You may have beated Joshua Lau but who did he beat in that rating period?

i dont know, but his rating has gone up quite a bit now 664-726, so he mustve played quite stronger opponents, and so his loss to me doesnt seem to affect his rating. Yeah there a bit stronger, but what about those wins against the 600 rated people? i also had quite alot of wins over 400 rated, which doesnt really count but still, im expecting more than a 30+ rating gain

sonyrobocup
14-09-2005, 04:39 PM
i dont know, but his rating has gone up quite a bit now 664-726, so he mustve played quite stronger opponents, and so his loss to me doesnt seem to affect his rating. Yeah there a bit stronger, but what about those wins against the 600 rated people? i also had quite alot of wins over 400 rated, which doesnt really count but still, im expecting more than a 30+ rating gain


Your rating is accurate. Because you lost to people who rated much lower than you. Your losses balanced your wins. You need to take losses into account when calculating rating change.

Alan Shore
14-09-2005, 05:21 PM
Your rating is accurate. Because you lost to people who rated much lower than you. Your losses balanced your wins. You need to take losses into account when calculating rating change.

Heh, we didn't hear about the losses!

bunta
14-09-2005, 07:04 PM
Your rating is accurate. Because you lost to people who rated much lower than you. Your losses balanced your wins. You need to take losses into account when calculating rating change.

they were losses to higher rated players like mid 600 rated

Frank Walker
14-09-2005, 07:10 PM
Nice to see young people on the bulettin board ( getting to my 40's, dont tell my wife I said That) , if my research skills are correct you are around 9 years old. I wont confirm u are a junior yet as there is another person with a rating of 536.

Are rating for juniors different than ratings for adults?

Bill Gletsos
14-09-2005, 07:19 PM
Nice to see young people on the bulettin board ( getting to my 40's, dont tell my wife I said That) , if my research skills are correct you are around 9 years old. I wont confirm u are a junior yet as there is another person with a rating of 536.I think you are misunderstanding Bunta.

As he stated elsewhere on another thread he is rated 1021 on the ACF Sept 2005 rating list.

The 536 rating he is referring to is his junior rating on the latest NSWJCL rating list published in the NSWJCL Sept 2005 magazine.

Are rating for juniors different than ratings for adults?Not in the ACF rating system.
However some states run their own Junior rating system. The rating scale of the NSWJCL has no relationship to the ACF scale.

Garvinator
14-09-2005, 07:44 PM
However some states run their own Junior rating system. The rating scale of the NSWJCL has no relationship to the ACF scale.
CAQ has its own junior rating system as well for junior only tournaments. It uses the old elo system, but has alot more tournaments rated as there is no charge.

Frank Walker
14-09-2005, 08:12 PM
Oh, never knew NSW had thier own ratings!

Mischa
14-09-2005, 08:47 PM
how old are you bunta?

Frank Walker
14-09-2005, 08:53 PM
Probably got it wrong because I did not know NSW had its own Junior Rating.

Frank Walker
14-09-2005, 08:57 PM
I think he is about 16 than

PHAT
14-09-2005, 09:30 PM
The rating scale of the NSWJCL has no relationship to the ACF scale.


This is an outragously obsurd statement. Think about it. :rolleyes:

Bill Gletsos
14-09-2005, 10:50 PM
This is an outragously obsurd statement. Think about it. :rolleyes:No it isnt when taken in the context of my response to Frank who clearly believed believed that bunta's 536 NSWJCL rating was in fact a 536 ACF rating.

PHAT
14-09-2005, 11:48 PM
No it isnt when taken in the context of my response to Frank who clearly believed believed that bunta's 536 NSWJCL rating was in fact a 536 ACF rating.

Wrong, it IS obsurd to say "The rating scale of the NSWJCL has no relationship to the ACF scale," They are both mathematically derived scales, each with a characteristic distribution. Thus, for a steady state population, there MUST be a relationship, with a quantifiable deviation for non-stable individuals.

But hang on, no one will ever be able to calculate that deviation because the ACF ratings officer has sealed the RDs in a vault classified TOP SECRET.

Alan Shore
15-09-2005, 12:37 AM
Wrong, it IS obsurd to say "The rating scale of the NSWJCL has no relationship to the ACF scale," They are both mathematically derived scales, each with a characteristic distribution. Thus, for a steady state population, there MUST be a relationship, with a quantifiable deviation for non-stable individuals.

Mmm, that's being a bit picky, if you read what Bill said.


But hang on, no one will ever be able to calculate that deviation because the ACF ratings officer has sealed the RDs in a vault classified TOP SECRET.

Well, that's a separate matter. ;)

Bill Gletsos
15-09-2005, 12:43 AM
Wrong, it IS obsurd to say "The rating scale of the NSWJCL has no relationship to the ACF scale," They are both mathematically derived scales, each with a characteristic distribution. Thus, for a steady state population, there MUST be a relationship, with a quantifiable deviation for non-stable individuals.Your post is totally irrelevant to the matter at hand.
It is abundantly clear to anyone of the meanest intellect that Frank was confused about Bunta's 536 rating and believed it to be his ACF rating. A 536 NSWJCL rating is not equal to a 536 ACF rating. I was simply pointing this out.

In fact based on Frank's misunderstanding he could mistakenly believe that Ronald's Yu who currently has the the highest NSWJCL rating of 1225 is weaker than you with your 1269 rating.
NOW that would be absurd. :owned:

But hang on, no one will ever be able to calculate that deviation because the ACF ratings officer has sealed the RDs in a vault classified TOP SECRET.You can determine the population mean and standard deviation of the total ACF player population from the published master list.
You can do likewise for the NSWJCL population.

You could no doubt compare the ratings of players on both the NSWJCL list and the ACF master list and determine a relationship is you so desired.

All of which has absolutely nothing to do with Frank's misunderstanding regarding bunta's 536 NSWJCL rating.

PHAT
15-09-2005, 01:06 AM
In fact based on Frank's misunderstanding he could mistakenly believe that Ronald's Yu who currently has the the highest NSWJCL rating of 1225 is weaker than you with your 1269 rating.
NOW that would be absurd. :owned:

You might think it funny to ridicule people for their rating - perhaps it is a tendency born of elitism - but as NSWCA Pres. I would ask that you do not insult me personally.



You can determine the population mean and standard deviation of the total ACF player population from the published master list.
You can do likewise for the NSWJCL population.

Irrelevent to what I said, Bill. I refered to the RD of individuals, not populations. Only the ACF has the individual data. And it remains TOP SECRET.


You could no doubt compare the ratings of players on both the NSWJCL list and the ACF master list and determine a relationship is you so desired.

As you well know, there is already an approximating formula for converting. From memory it is something like 1.25*JCL+600=ACF.(?) Perhaps, if you wanted to be helpful to Frank, you could have told him.

Bill Gletsos
15-09-2005, 01:38 AM
You might think it funny to ridicule people for their rating - perhaps it is a tendency born of elitismI dont ridicule people because of their ratings. I just ridicule fools when they start frothing idiotically (especially those who have a habit of it).

- but as NSWCA Pres. I would ask that you do not insult me personally.This is rich coming from you, the person who has insulted me personally on numerous occasions and especially on your defunct bulletin board is the vilest of terms.

Irrelevent to what I said, Bill. I refered to the RD of individuals, not populations. Only the ACF has the individual data. And it remains TOP SECRET.It is not irrelevant at all. You dont need the RD's to determine the relationship between the ratings of players who have both NSWJCL and ACF rating

As you well know, there is already an approximating formula for converting. From memory it is something like 1.25*JCL+600=ACF.(?) Perhaps, if you wanted to be helpful to Frank, you could have told him.It was not in my opinion going to be at all helpful in rectifying Frank's misunderstanding with regards bunta's 536 rating.

Oh and by the way your memory is as usual faulty.
Supposedly a rough conversion of NSWJCL ratings to ACF ratings is ACF = 2*J where J is less than 600 and ACF = (J*1.25) + 450 for J > 600.

Frank Walker
17-09-2005, 08:00 AM
:whistle: BIll always tries to defend his rating system, however it is about 20% of the time in which he actually succeeds.

Bill Gletsos
17-09-2005, 11:18 AM
:whistle: BIll always tries to defend his rating system, however it is about 20% of the time in which he actually succeeds.Well I know you demonstrated you didnt have much of a clue at the start of this thread and so I have tried to enlighten you, apparently without much success.
You seemingly fail to realise that this whole thread has nothing to do with the ACF rating system but with the NSWJCL system as it was his NSWJCL rating taht bunta was talking about.

Alan Shore
17-09-2005, 08:12 PM
Who devised the NSWJCL ratings system anyway? It's an odd one (no idea how valid or reliable it is).

Bill Gletsos
17-09-2005, 08:33 PM
Who devised the NSWJCL ratings system anyway? It's an odd one (no idea how valid or reliable it is).Not completely sure but I think Allan Wright.

Alan Shore
17-09-2005, 08:44 PM
Not completely sure but I think Allan Wright.

Ever thought of just getting rid of it and using the glicko? (you already have a conversion formula).

Bill Gletsos
17-09-2005, 09:00 PM
Ever thought of just getting rid of it and using the glicko? (you already have a conversion formula).That would be a decision for the NSWJCL to make, however I suspect many of the players who get a rating from it would not get one from the ACF system (lack of rateable games).

Also all NSWJCL games that meet the ACF normal rating requirements are currently rated (e.g State junior Championships and City of Sydney Junior Championships) on the ACF system.
However most of their games would be on the ACF rapid list or not rated at all.
As for the so called conversion formula, I'm not convinced of its accuaracy.

four four two
18-09-2005, 01:31 AM
Bunta,if your gonna be obsessed with your rating then you should go where the points are,playing against adults will benefit your game overall,especially your opening theory. In 3 rating lists from now,if you have half decent results,your ACF could easily be above 1300. ;)

bunta
19-09-2005, 03:32 PM
how old are you bunta?

i just turned 17, and started playing for the NSWJCL and adult games since april of this year, my rating was originally 441 now its 536 and my 1st ever adult rating is 1021. So yeah as you can see i've started at a very late age for a junior

OCfan
07-01-2006, 04:19 PM
a rating is just a bunch of numbers, who really cares about it anyway?