EPTImportance of MLG, GSL & other top tournaments - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
lunchrush
United States138 Posts
| ||
|
Primadog
United States4411 Posts
On September 03 2011 17:43 Primadog wrote: Re: prestige In my attempts to find a proper projection algorithm for SC2, I have experimented with several methods to account for tournament prestige. What I learned from these experience is that while certain types of players will play better in different tournament types (large or small, group or elimination, online or offline), these factors do not have a strong effect of the actual player skill rating. They are simply an added variance around the skill curve. In other word, I find projections becomes more accurate if we disregard tournament type while making a rating calculation, then use that rating and account for for tournament type during the projection phase. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10924 Posts
How? Take the avg. ELO of the RO32 and give "bonuspoints" depending on this number. Smaller tournaments with qualifiers could also be judged that way (just take into account the qualifiers). + some Bonus for LAN-Events. Positive: Even "small but hard" online tournaments would actually be worth much while weak ones wouldn't. Negative: You would have to do the math for nearly every tournament. I would actually completely disregard KOTH's and Showmachtes with low prices as they are prone to become "fungames". The main problem for me seem to be the different "server cultures"... EU is riddled with small tournaments with very low NA participation, NA seems to have not many small tournaments but a few very big leagues like IPL/NASL (in which Euros are participating)... BTW: Not taking into account tournaments would be kinda "bad". If your possibly the best player in the world but never win a big tournament and/or do not even place good you obviously shouldn't count as the best player there is... | ||
|
JustPassingBy
10776 Posts
(i.e say player a beats player c in an invitational will get more points than player b beating player c in the finals of a small weekly cup) | ||
|
Fishgle
United States2174 Posts
If player X has the same record as Y (same opponents, win/loss, etc) Why should one player have more points just because the other got cheesed out in Code B? The perfect measurement of skill, (your opponents), is already there, and that's what we're judging. I don't care if our next president is afraid of speaking in public as long as he can do good behind the scenes. Likewise I don't care that MMA chokes under pressure, when we all know that he's a top player in his comfort zone. Starcraft is a competition, and it isn't the player's fault that a crowd is watching and judging their every move, nor is that what they should be judged on. besides, The best player will be at the top of the ranking regardless of whether we give extra points to large tournaments or not, since he'll be playing the best players at the big tourneys anyway. | ||
|
ishyishy
United States826 Posts
But if they stick to elim then they can award something like: +3 points for a match win in a Bo3 +1 point if you win a game in a Bo3 (the person that went 1-2 would receive 1 point for winning a game for example) For Bo5's, that is generally very high, if not the finals, of a tournament so points wouldnt matter. | ||
| ||
