Outwitters WORLD CUP Winner - Alvendor (SWEDEN)

[awpertunity]

(09-01-2012 05:54 AM)CombatEX Wrote:  I don't understand this

8 - Gifted - 369 points - 47 wins
23 - Gifted - 431 points - 86 wins
18 - Gifted - 381 points - 42 wins

Surely 18 should be above both 8 and 23.

You're definitely right about that, thanks, I've fixed it on my copy.


As for the points/wins ratio, that was actually the way I intended to do it originally, and here is the reason I didn't in the end:

For a massive pool of players, I agree, points/wins would be the best way to quickly compare them. But for 32 players, I thought just doing it case by case as I've been doing it was better because of two things. One was the one you mentioned that 2v2 games are included in total wins which deflate the person's skill, but also to the people at 80+ wins. The points tend to get saturated (this is from my own experience only). When I started, I quickly rose from 0 to 1200 points in my first 60-80 games. In the last 60 games I've won I've only increased from 1200 to 1300 or so. Obviously this is because I am now losing games as well, but also I don't get as many points for wins anymore. But according to just points/win ratio, the more games I play at this point my "skill" is supposedly decreasing which is definitely not true.

The points/wins gives the best score to the people at around 40-50 games that are winning all their easy games and getting around 20-32 points for each win. No matter who I play at this point, I cannot get more than about 18 points for a win, and so points/win is no longer relative.



Doesn't matter too much to me either way, we can let people decide here if people care one way or the other. If people want a more structured way of calculating seed then points/win makes sense. But this definitely is not a true indication of skill.