| goran
- 15 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 428
|
In an effort to grow the air hockey player base, I have made a few changes to the rating system to make it more attractive to beginners.
1. Challenge sets, and tournament sets can be 2 of 3, 3 of 5, or 4 of 7.
2. Challenge games are now available.
The weights will be 4 for a challenge game. 8 for best 2 of 3 set, 16 for best 3 of 5 set, 30 for 4 of 7 set, state tourney doubles weight. Nationals tripple. Challenge match 30 per set, 90 for match. Spin offs are 1/2 weight. Players with a rating over 2000 use half the weight. Any tournament using a 1 game format will use challenge game to calculate rating change. challenge games do not count toward the 5 sets needed to get an official rating.
Weekly tournament matches with no point spot can count if both players agree.
I would also like to put together a rating committe to come up with rules that will help grow the player base and make the ratings more accurate. I will take the first 5 vollenteers along with Travis and I. We will exchange ideas via email and I will present the information at the USAA board meeting.
Here are some examples of ideas I have that have not yet been implemented...
1.after 2 years of inactivity, a player is removed from the rating list and rating is rounded down to the nearest 100. They have to re-establish from that point.
2.A qualifying match to establish rating, or maintain your rating must be played against an opponent whose rating is +/- 300 points from your current rating.
|
|
|
| TheAirHockeyGuy
- 15 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 472
|
goran said: In an effort to grow the air hockey player base, I have made a few changes to the rating system to make it more attractive to beginners.
1. Challenge sets, and tournament sets can be 2 of 3, 3 of 5, or 4 of 7.
2. Challenge games are now available.
The weights will be 4 for a challenge game. 8 for best 2 of 3 set, 16 for best 3 of 5 set, 30 for 4 of 7 set, state tourney doubles weight. Nationals tripple. Challenge match 30 per set, 90 for match. Spin offs are 1/2 weight. Players with a rating over 2000 use half the weight. Any tournament using a 1 game format will use challenge game to calculate rating change. challenge games do not count toward the 5 sets needed to get an official rating.
Weekly tournament matches with no point spot can count if both players agree.
I would also like to put together a rating committe to come up with rules that will help grow the player base and make the ratings more accurate. I will take the first 5 vollenteers along with Travis and I. We will exchange ideas via email and I will present the information at the USAA board meeting.
Here are some examples of ideas I have that have not yet been implemented...
1.after 2 years of inactivity, a player is removed from the rating list and rating is rounded down to the nearest 100. They have to re-establish from that point.
2.A qualifying match to establish rating, or maintain your rating must be played against an opponent whose rating is +/- 300 points from your current rating.
|
I'd be interested Goran.
Chris Lee
Co-Founder, CEO
Air Hockey Players Association (AHPA)
|
|
|
|
| goran
- 16 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 428
|
| Awesome Chris. We need 4 more volenteers.
|
|
|
|
| TheAirHockeyGuy
- 16 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 472
|
goran said: In an effort to grow the air hockey player base, I have made a few changes to the rating system to make it more attractive to beginners.
1. Challenge sets, and tournament sets can be 2 of 3, 3 of 5, or 4 of 7.
2. Challenge games are now available.
The weights will be 4 for a challenge game. 8 for best 2 of 3 set, 16 for best 3 of 5 set, 30 for 4 of 7 set, state tourney doubles weight. Nationals tripple. Challenge match 30 per set, 90 for match. Spin offs are 1/2 weight. Players with a rating over 2000 use half the weight. Any tournament using a 1 game format will use challenge game to calculate rating change. challenge games do not count toward the 5 sets needed to get an official rating.
Weekly tournament matches with no point spot can count if both players agree.
I would also like to put together a rating committe to come up with rules that will help grow the player base and make the ratings more accurate. I will take the first 5 vollenteers along with Travis and I. We will exchange ideas via email and I will present the information at the USAA board meeting.
Here are some examples of ideas I have that have not yet been implemented...
1.after 2 years of inactivity, a player is removed from the rating list and rating is rounded down to the nearest 100. They have to re-establish from that point.
2.A qualifying match to establish rating, or maintain your rating must be played against an opponent whose rating is +/- 300 points from your current rating.
|
I think that these changes are a great step in the right direction to getting more people to play ratings matches and log their results. My one side goal right now is really to get an app built for Android so that people can enter match scores using an app on their phone. It will also contains some of the basic information from ahw.com like the rules and events. Hopefully someday I will actually get to work on this.
Chris
Chris Lee
Co-Founder, CEO
Air Hockey Players Association (AHPA)
|
|
|
|
| TheAirHockeyGuy
- 17 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 472
|
TheAirHockeyGuy said: goran said:
2.A qualifying match to establish rating, or maintain your rating must be played against an opponent whose rating is +/- 300 points from your current rating.
|
I'd be interested Goran.
|
How do new players know what their rating is during the provisional stage? Its been a while since I was provisional but I seem to remember that your rating didn't show up until it wasn't provisional anymore? Don't you think that this restriction would have the opposite effect of allowing challenge games? Can't we just decide on a low very low number of points to allow people to start with? Some number that would be low enough to where we could easily tell that had not played someone that currently holds a rating? This would allow people that hadn't played a currently rated player to at least play each other and earn or lose points, they just wouldn't really be able to move up very high unless they sought out a much higher rated player. We could just start them with maybe 1000 pts (or less). I just think that making people find a rated player before they get any rating at all might still discourage people from signing up and recording games.
On a side note, at some point these changes need to be added to the description on this page on how the rating system works. Also it would need to be added to the ratings calculator that players can use to simulate possible outcomes.
Chris Lee
Co-Founder, CEO
Air Hockey Players Association (AHPA)
|
|
|
|
| goran
- 18 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 428
|
| Provisional rated players still show up on the list, the just don't effect established ratings until they are established.
|
|
|
| carolina phil
- 18 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 1084
|
All this sounds like positive steps. I encourage those interested to join with Goran and Chris is their discussions.
Phil Arnold
|
|
|
|
| goran
- 22 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 428
|
| It looks like its just going to be Chris, Travis and I to decide on rules for the rating system. I would think more people would like to be a part of growing air hockey.
|
|
|
|
| goran
- 22 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 428
|
| Challenge games are now being played in Illinois. We need to encourage beginners to play each other 1 game and enter the score for ratings. My goal is to have 1000 players rated by the end of the year. All we need is first and last name of the players and the score of the game. You can encourage the new players to go to airhockeyworld.com to check out their rating and update their profile.
|
|
|
|
| TheAirHockeyGuy
- 22 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 472
|
goran said: | Challenge games are now being played in Illinois. We need to encourage beginners to play each other 1 game and enter the score for ratings. My goal is to have 1000 players rated by the end of the year. All we need is first and last name of the players and the score of the game. You can encourage the new players to go to airhockeyworld.com to check out their rating and update their profile. |
I vote we reduce everyone elses rating by 1000. LOL
Chris Lee
Co-Founder, CEO
Air Hockey Players Association (AHPA)
|
|
|
| jasonstevens
- 22 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 176
|
goran said: | It looks like its just going to be Chris, Travis and I to decide on rules for the rating system. I would think more people would like to be a part of growing air hockey. |
Honestly the system is too complicated. Unless you have been following the whole process it is hard to understand. I bet if you asked every person in the tournament in Houston to explain the system more than half of them wouldn't have a clue.
|
|
|
| Q
- 22 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 497
|
| If not too late I'd like to volunteer to help with the ratings. I think the things said so far and the rating games are great ideas
|
|
|
| Darth_Wafu
- 22 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 117
|
goran said: | It looks like its just going to be Chris, Travis and I to decide on rules for the rating system. I would think more people would like to be a part of growing air hockey. |
I would be interested, but I am not technically a part of the USAA
Nick Geoffroy
|
|
|
|
| goran
- 22 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 428
|
| The committee will be Travis, Chris, Nick, Dan, Q, and I.
|
|
|
| Mike C
- 22 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 459
|
Goran, I apologize, I did not check this out earlier this week. This is something I am interested in also and expressed an interest to you a few months ago. If you need volunteers, I am more than willing.
Mike
|
|
|
|
| goran
- 23 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 428
|
Mike C said: Goran, I apologize, I did not check this out earlier this week. This is something I am interested in also and expressed an interest to you a few months ago. If you need volunteers, I am more than willing.
Mike |
Your in!
|
|
|
|
| Mike C
- 26 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 459
|
| I like the idea of challenge games included. This can be important here in Houston with Weeklies. For example, many players 'deny' their points in weekly matches to use as an incentive to get better. As example if a level 4 (me)denies points to a level 5 (Phil) or 6 (Danny) then in agreement, the match could be considered a ratings game and utilized for rating purposes. The trick will be 'how to capture' the games without it being too cumbersome. We have 20 to 35 people per week at weeklies and there are 5 or 6 people that I can think of that will deny points on a regular basis. It may add a little value and incentive to have more players play straight up more often in the weekly environment. Capturing the games will be the trick at a weekly and Travis and Goran, you may already know the answer.
|
|
|
| travis
- 26 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 530
|
It's definitely possible, I would just have to give the TD the ability to denote on each match whether or not the player denied his or her points, and then have some kind of automated way where the points updated the ratings.
Travis Luscombe
AirHockeyWorld.com Webmaster
http://twitter.com/air_hockey
|
|
|
| jdtaylor
- 26 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 36
|
| FWIW, I would deny my points more often if it were made official that I was doing so.
|
|
|
|
| goran
- 26 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 428
|
Mike C said: | I like the idea of challenge games included. This can be important here in Houston with Weeklies. For example, many players 'deny' their points in weekly matches to use as an incentive to get better. As example if a level 4 (me)denies points to a level 5 (Phil) or 6 (Danny) then in agreement, the match could be considered a ratings game and utilized for rating purposes. The trick will be 'how to capture' the games without it being too cumbersome. We have 20 to 35 people per week at weeklies and there are 5 or 6 people that I can think of that will deny points on a regular basis. It may add a little value and incentive to have more players play straight up more often in the weekly environment. Capturing the games will be the trick at a weekly and Travis and Goran, you may already know the answer. |
This would be great if Travis can get the automation of ratings from weeklies. I would suggest counting all sets with no point spot, including when point spots are waved.
|
|
|
| ajflanagan
- 26 Jul 2011
Total Posts: 509
|
| Would it be easier to have every match calculate into the ratings, but give handicapped matches a weight of zero? That way, the database still tracks and stores the match but the results don't effect the numbers.
|
|
|
| Mauro
- 10 Aug 2011
Total Posts: 83
|
Hi there!
I have missed this post for a long time, I would have loved to be a part of this commission, but i guess now it's too late to join :(
I've got a question regarding the recent changes been made: how many sets, and games per set are required for a match to be considered as a challenge match i the Mitic ratings count?
Should it be minimum 3/5 sets (4/7 each set), as it is for a USAA challenge match?
I have tried with the automatic calculator, and if you label a match as a challenge match, it counts the 90 points bonus, even if there's just 1 game played.
|
|
|
|
| goran
- 10 Aug 2011
Total Posts: 428
|
| Hi Mauro, we would love to have you join the rating committee. I will copy you in on future emails and forward what we have discussed so far. The challenge match must be 3 of 5, or 4 of 7 sets for the 90k bonus.
|
|
|
| brain
- 13 Aug 2011
Total Posts: 578
|
1) I like the changes. it gets us closer to a system that will accurately represent the nature in how we play airhockey.
2) Why again can we not take weekly tournament matches with a point spot as even? If I spot a beginner 5, the idea is that makes the match even. Why not treat that match as 2 masters playing? It raises the zero to my level. Point spots are designed to create balance. That should be easy to encapsulate.
3) There is still my concern with boundaries. What prevents Mike Cummings and me from playing 20 sets a week? (We live on streets next to each other and both own tables). There need to be boundaries on players playing each other to jack up their ratings. If this has been done, and I am ignornant to it, please explain how this is restricted.
Ultimatety, I agree that rating are the long term solution for this sport.
Brian Accrocco
|
|
|
|
| TheAirHockeyGuy
- 13 Aug 2011
Total Posts: 472
|
brain said: 1) I like the changes. it gets us closer to a system that will accurately represent the nature in how we play airhockey.
2) Why again can we not take weekly tournament matches with a point spot as even? If I spot a beginner 5, the idea is that makes the match even. Why not treat that match as 2 masters playing? It raises the zero to my level. Point spots are designed to create balance. That should be easy to encapsulate.
3) There is still my concern with boundaries. What prevents Mike Cummings and me from playing 20 sets a week? (We live on streets next to each other and both own tables). There need to be boundaries on players playing each other to jack up their ratings. If this has been done, and I am ignornant to it, please explain how this is restricted.
Ultimatety, I agree that rating are the long term solution for this sport.
Brian Accrocco |
I don't think that even if you were to play each other 100 times a week that it would distort anything. At some point the number of points you get would reach a plateau and you really wouldn't have much to gain. Its no different then me playing Nick all the time. If I were to beat Nick every day for the next month his points would lower and mine would rise until we met somewhere in the middle. At that point we would be expected to play each other evenly based on our close rating and we really wouldn't gain a lot of points by playing each other because the rating system would have already done what it was designed to do which would be to demonstrate based on our close rating that we are very equal in skill level.
Chris Lee
Co-Founder, CEO
Air Hockey Players Association (AHPA)
|
|
|
|
| goran
- 13 Aug 2011
Total Posts: 428
|
Brian, I like your idea of treating point spots as equal, but I would recommend first to use the rating system to determine the point spot. Then we would have to lower the weight since if its really like 2 masters playing, 1 of them still starts at 5. What if point spots are reversed where a 5 starts the game -5 to 0?
Also in your example beating Mike a set now might get you 1 point, and eventually you get 0. In other examples of style match ups, I don't see why we can't limit sets between the same people within reason.
Ratings is defenatly the future of the sport. Along with good marketing it will grow the player base larger then many can imagine.
|
|
|
|
| jasonstevens
- 13 Aug 2011
Total Posts: 176
|
brain said: 1) I like the changes. it gets us closer to a system that will accurately represent the nature in how we play airhockey.
2) Why again can we not take weekly tournament matches with a point spot as even? If I spot a beginner 5, the idea is that makes the match even. Why not treat that match as 2 masters playing? It raises the zero to my level. Point spots are designed to create balance. That should be easy to encapsulate.
3) There is still my concern with boundaries. What prevents Mike Cummings and me from playing 20 sets a week? (We live on streets next to each other and both own tables). There need to be boundaries on players playing each other to jack up their ratings. If this has been done, and I am ignornant to it, please explain how this is restricted.
Ultimatety, I agree that rating are the long term solution for this sport.
Brian Accrocco |
gotta disagree on #2. I think a level 5 player will beat a level 0 player even with the 5 point spot WAY more than if 2 level 5 players played each other straight up.
|
|
|
|
| goran
- 13 Aug 2011
Total Posts: 428
|
| If you believe your rating is lower then it should be, and you don't feel like you need to go out and play to prove otherwise, you can patition the rating commitee to loop your last 10 matches to adjust your rating. your rating must be lower then 5 players you finished ahead of at your last national tournament and the looping will be done only once per year. If 10 matches are not on record, you will be relooped until 10 matches are captured. I just relooped Vic Green bringing his rating from 1023 to 1170, and Javier Pulido from 1476 to 1641.
|
|
|
|
| jasonstevens
- 13 Aug 2011
Total Posts: 176
|
goran said: | If you believe your rating is lower then it should be, and you don't feel like you need to go out and play to prove otherwise, you can patition the rating commitee to loop your last 10 matches to adjust your rating. your rating must be lower then 5 players you finished ahead of at your last national tournament and the looping will be done only once per year. If 10 matches are not on record, you will be relooped until 10 matches are captured. I just relooped Vic Green bringing his rating from 1023 to 1170, and Javier Pulido from 1476 to 1641. |
when was this ever discussed? First I have heard of it.
Somehow this doesn't seem to be productive as it gives people a way to manipulate the system. Someone could figure a way to make the loop work out better for them by playing (winning or losing against certain people?) or even if they had a hot streak at a tournaey or some other time to boost their points.
|
|
|
| fupersly
- 13 Aug 2011
Total Posts: 231
|
| What does "looping" a rating mean? I admit I'm pretty ignorant about the inner workings of the ratings system in general, but I know I've never heard of that before.
|
First |
1 | 2 |
Last
Forums Home / Tournaments and Challenges / Changes to rating system
|
