2 ms·
It seems to me that one of the biggest related problems with chess is that the quality of the player rating system has not kept pace with the development of the
by svnt 4y ago
It seems to me that one of the biggest related problems with chess is that the quality of the player rating system has not kept pace with the development of the game.
If I am an ok player and memorize a complex line and a handful of tricks I can beat enough players to raise my rating. If I leave that line my rating will fall. Am I a better player?
The player rating systems might benefit from a “play style diversity” or “flexibility of approach” indicator to expose players that rely on one-weird-trick traps.
- astrobe_ 4y agoThe trick you describe reminds me of "first order optimal strategies" [1], a.k.a. "noob strat" or "chesse" in online gaming lingo. The thing is, as your rating rises, you meet more and more player that know those strategies, and your rating will reach a plateau - typically in the equivalent of low gold league (slightly above average). As for the rating system, ELO is very practical for matchmaking and numerous games have adopted it (including MOBAs, RTS, FPS games). [1] https://thethoughtfulgamer.com/2017/03/09/first-order-optimal-strategies-narrative-inspired-heuristics/ https://thethoughtfulgamer.com/2017/03/09/first-order-optima...
- wbc 4y agoThis happens across many competitive games, where you can raise your Elo/MMR by playing gimmicky stuff instead of working on fundamentals. E.g. ling rush in Starcraft, 1-tricking in League, etc etc. Sure you can score based on flexibility, but the people who work hard on staying competitive knows at heart all ratings are just an approximation anyways. Just work on fundamentals, get good, and don't sweat the numbers. Not a problem worth fixing imo.