Tweet
A proposal for a Simple Rating system for any match-play sport / game. Note: system is untested, points documented here may need adjusting.
TCP = Total Career Points
SR = Simple Rating
When applied to any game or sport in which one individual or team competes against only 1 other individual or team, this proposal documents a point scoring and rating system that can replace more complex systems such as Elo. It offers two advantages: (1) simplicity of calculation, and (2) in addition to rating, there is a point aggregation that allows the awarding of titles based on reaching career points thresholds, rather than the usage of rating thresholds and / or "norm" achievements.
When applied to chess, which already widely uses Elo:
This system is not meant to replace the Elo rating system for chess. Rather, it may be used as a means for less serious players to have their own sections at events, separate from the more serious Elo rated players, and to forgo Elo ratings (and the costs involved) in favor of the Simple Ratings (described below) that they can do themselves as they are playing in an event.
This may encourage less serious chess players to "try out" organized chess without being thrown to the lions, as it were, and having to play against much more serious and studious players. Thus the initially less serious players play against peers, in their own section run by a separate organizer (who may be interning to become a "real" organizer, and can learn organizing without possibly getting involved in "serious" disputes that affect real Elo ratings). The less serious players thus have the chance to get comfortable with organized chess. At any time before an event starts, they may elect to pay full membership for Elo ratings fees and join the more serious players.
There are no ratings fees needed for Simple Rating because the players can do those ratings themselves. Thus the less serious player can continue to enter events at much reduced cost by playing in the SR section (this type of player otherwise would likely disappear from organized chess altogether).
The major feature of this system is that it allows players and TDs / organizers to quickly calculate ratings and TCP for anyone at anytime, requiring only a pocket calculator for accuracy in SR calculation (because of the division). An event's results will not have to be sent to a central organization for doing these calculations. Nevertheless, a central organization will be desired to keep TCP and SR records over time in a database and to do validation. If a TD posts along with game results the changes to each player's TCP and SR, s/he should have a second and even a third check done by the players involved, who will report their agreement or disagreement if an error should be made (such as transposing digits or failure to round a decimal place).
A local chess club might attract new members in greater numbers if they advertise that the new members can have cheap initial membership, can play against new players like themselves, and can calculate their own Simple Ratings on the fly and always know where they stand.
( continued, post is too long...)
TCP = Total Career Points
SR = Simple Rating
When applied to any game or sport in which one individual or team competes against only 1 other individual or team, this proposal documents a point scoring and rating system that can replace more complex systems such as Elo. It offers two advantages: (1) simplicity of calculation, and (2) in addition to rating, there is a point aggregation that allows the awarding of titles based on reaching career points thresholds, rather than the usage of rating thresholds and / or "norm" achievements.
When applied to chess, which already widely uses Elo:
This system is not meant to replace the Elo rating system for chess. Rather, it may be used as a means for less serious players to have their own sections at events, separate from the more serious Elo rated players, and to forgo Elo ratings (and the costs involved) in favor of the Simple Ratings (described below) that they can do themselves as they are playing in an event.
This may encourage less serious chess players to "try out" organized chess without being thrown to the lions, as it were, and having to play against much more serious and studious players. Thus the initially less serious players play against peers, in their own section run by a separate organizer (who may be interning to become a "real" organizer, and can learn organizing without possibly getting involved in "serious" disputes that affect real Elo ratings). The less serious players thus have the chance to get comfortable with organized chess. At any time before an event starts, they may elect to pay full membership for Elo ratings fees and join the more serious players.
There are no ratings fees needed for Simple Rating because the players can do those ratings themselves. Thus the less serious player can continue to enter events at much reduced cost by playing in the SR section (this type of player otherwise would likely disappear from organized chess altogether).
The major feature of this system is that it allows players and TDs / organizers to quickly calculate ratings and TCP for anyone at anytime, requiring only a pocket calculator for accuracy in SR calculation (because of the division). An event's results will not have to be sent to a central organization for doing these calculations. Nevertheless, a central organization will be desired to keep TCP and SR records over time in a database and to do validation. If a TD posts along with game results the changes to each player's TCP and SR, s/he should have a second and even a third check done by the players involved, who will report their agreement or disagreement if an error should be made (such as transposing digits or failure to round a decimal place).
A local chess club might attract new members in greater numbers if they advertise that the new members can have cheap initial membership, can play against new players like themselves, and can calculate their own Simple Ratings on the fly and always know where they stand.
( continued, post is too long...)
Comment