IcePack wrote:I'm trying to get the discussion back on topic.
Sorry, i will shut up.
Moderator: Clan Directors
IcePack wrote:I'm trying to get the discussion back on topic.
skillfull wrote:IcePack wrote:I'm trying to get the discussion back on topic.
Sorry, i will shut up.
silversun6 wrote:can people be banned from writing in forums for a while?
Keefie wrote:Gilligan wrote:Top 15, yeah!
Enjoy it while it lasts
Crazyirishman wrote:silversun6 wrote:can people be banned from writing in forums for a while?
I had a solution, but ti got promptly shot down in the suggs forum.
But in F400 news, for our matches against AOC in CL5, do both of them need to be finished before they count, or will they be added individually?
IcePack wrote:10-4 will do
puppydog85 wrote:ok, maybe a stupid question here:
I was sent here by someone who said there was a conversation here about why an average could not be done with the merger. Right now, looking through the last 10 pages, all I find is Ice saying it's too hard. Was there another conversation somewhere? I would be interested in finding out why it's too hard.
Secondly, is there a formula posted somewhere as to the rating calculator? I take it that it is not a simple ELO rating?
Thanks
FarangDemon wrote:Welcome! For the example clan ranking based on all clan wars and Clan League data prior to Mar 29, go to this post:
viewtopic.php?f=438&t=140929&start=15#p3088157
The remainder of this post is my original post, describing the method and my initial application of it to the results of Clan League 3 only (nothing else). You have to start small, right?wikipedia wrote:Performance Rating is a hypothetical rating that would result from the games of a single event only. Some chess organizations use the "algorithm of 400" to calculate performance rating. According to this algorithm, performance rating for an event is calculated by taking (1) the rating of each player beaten and adding 400, (2) the rating of each player lost to and subtracting 400, (3) the rating of each player drawn, and (4) summing these figures and dividing by the number of games played. This can be expressed by the following formula:
Performance rating = [(Total of opponents' ratings + 400 * (Wins - Losses)) / Games].
I've taken this formula and modified it to get a clan ranking based on CL3 performance.
I treat each set of 18 games (19 games in finals) from CL3 as a single game between two clans where each clan either wins, loses or ties.
The points a clan gets for each set is a function of their opponents rating at that time.
The rating of a clan is the weighted average of all such accumulated points.
(weighting is by games in the set, so reg season sets are weighted at 18, finals weighted at 19)
I started each clan at 1000 points.
I assumed that KORT beat TSM in the regular season 10-8 (the data in the thread are incomplete at 9-8 favoring KORT).
If TSM tied KORT please let me know and I'll update the ratings
FarangDemon wrote:I've updated the script.
http://www.killersapp.com/algorithmof400.htm
Decay Factor
There is now a decay factor. If the Data Window is set to 2 years (default), then a war today is weighted 100%, a war 6 months ago is 75%, 12 months ago is 50% and 18 months ago is 25%.
decay factor = Elapsed time from start of data window to clan war record / total length of data window
The weight changes continuously, day by day, so that over time, a clan's score will will not perceptibly spike up or down except immediately after conclusion of a new clan war.
Min Weight to Display in Ranking List
Restricts display of clans in the ranking list to those with minimum weight total. Total weight = Sum of products (decay * games) for each clan war record within data window. This ensures reliability of ranking.
Vid_FISO wrote:puppydog85 wrote:ok, maybe a stupid question here:
I was sent here by someone who said there was a conversation here about why an average could not be done with the merger. Right now, looking through the last 10 pages, all I find is Ice saying it's too hard. Was there another conversation somewhere? I would be interested in finding out why it's too hard.
Secondly, is there a formula posted somewhere as to the rating calculator? I take it that it is not a simple ELO rating?
Thanks
The discussion has been spread over a number of threads including CL5 and most of the CC4 threads (some of which are very long), I have read it but couldn't nail down exactly where.
puppydog85 wrote:ok, maybe a stupid question here:
I was sent here by someone who said there was a conversation here about why an average could not be done with the merger. Right now, looking through the last 10 pages, all I find is Ice saying it's too hard. Was there another conversation somewhere? I would be interested in finding out why it's too hard.
Secondly, is there a formula posted somewhere as to the rating calculator? I take it that it is not a simple ELO rating?
Thanks
puppydog85 wrote:Ok, just to clear this up: I greatly appreciate Ice and all that he does, my comment was as an outsider to this discussion merely wanting more information and being too lazy to look through 60+ pages of information (apparently consisting of josko and CoF for most of it). 2ndly, as a somewhat interested in math person, I am curious as to why in would be impossible, this is just to satisfy my curiosity as to the inner workings of this calculator. Again, I am not criticizing Ice nor am I the least bit interested in the Cup, whatever that is. (All this is if cheme was pointing at me with that general statement above)
puppydog85 wrote:2ndly, as a somewhat interested in math person, I am curious as to why in would be impossible, this is just to satisfy my curiosity as to the inner workings of this calculator.
ahunda wrote:puppydog85 wrote:2ndly, as a somewhat interested in math person, I am curious as to why in would be impossible, this is just to satisfy my curiosity as to the inner workings of this calculator.
As far as I know, the calculator (which means both the formula & the script running the calculations) were done by FarangDemon, who retired from CC years ago. IcePack collects all data (results of Clan challenges) and plugs it into the calculator, that produces the rankings then. Manual intervention is basically impossible.
IcePack could at any given time manually calculate the average score between 2 clans, but he cannot enter a clan into the calculator with a specific score. When he enters the data, all clans start at 0 (or rather 1000), and the script then processes all results in chronological order.
So it is impossible to have clan ACE start its history with the average score of AOC/Empire. It can start with 1000 (as all other clans) or with the score of either AOC or Empire at the time of their merger (by simply plugging in all former results of that clan for ACE).
Or you could plug in all former results of both AOC & Empire for ACE, but that seems not a good solution. The calculator weighs score of the opposition at the time of the challenge (so that a 20-20 against the #1 clan weighs differently than a 20-20 against the #30 clan). Merging all prior results of AOC & Empire into one (kind of pretending they have been one clan from the get-go) would therefore have quite an impact on all other clans, that faced them earlier.
Hope, that helps.
puppydog85 wrote:Ok, just to clear this up: I greatly appreciate Ice and all that he does, my comment was as an outsider to this discussion merely wanting more information and being too lazy to look through 60+ pages of information (apparently consisting of josko and CoF for most of it). 2ndly, as a somewhat interested in math person, I am curious as to why in would be impossible, this is just to satisfy my curiosity as to the inner workings of this calculator. Again, I am not criticizing Ice nor am I the least bit interested in the Cup, whatever that is. (All this is if cheme was pointing at me with that general statement above)
Users browsing this forum: No registered users