|
So in response to the volatility debate I changed the parameters a bit and recomputed all ratings from the start. The current lists also include a bunch of teamleague games that were missing originally (huge thanks to Conti for discovering this hole and filling it). In particular, this should help with some of the Kespa player ratings, since we now have data from the hybrid proleague.
As always, if you're interested in lending a hand, drop me a note. Suggestions are always welcome. I have a list of features I want to implement, but it's holidays and I'm busy fattening up. 
Conti, Grovbolle, KristofferAG and PhoenixVoid deserve thanks for helping out, and TLO for his shoutout too.
Current list: http://aligulac.com/periods/74/
History (has changed a bit): http://aligulac.com/periods/
I realize that the records page now looks dumb. Will get to that eventually.
The leading race is still Zerg, and the lagging race is still (as almost always) Protoss.
Current top 10:
-
 Life 2855
-
 PartinG 2633
- Sniper 2572
-
 Bomber 2492
- HyuN 2460
- BaBy 2442
- DongRaeGu 2439
- HerO 2415
- viOLet 2391
- EffOrt 2372
Top 10 foreigners (dat Zerg):
- VortiX 2270
- Snute 2255
- Scarlett 2247
- Sen 2141
- Stephano 2111
- LucifroN 2064
- CombatEX 2050 (yeah, yeah, I know)
- TLO 1993
- XlorD 1984
- MacSed 1943
|
incredibly amazing work and effort, thanks a lot!
|
I think this calls for a CombatEX vs Idra showmatch.
|
I think you should just remove CombatEX from the rankings all together since he is not even allowed on this website , it is pretty pointless to even have him in the rankings IMO, just move on to the next person please, wouldn't be hard to replace him with someone that actually matters.
|
On December 27 2012 22:29 GGzerG wrote:
I think you should just remove CombatEX from the rankings all together since he is not even allowed on this website , it is pretty pointless to even have him in the rankings IMO, just move on to the next person please, wouldn't be hard to replace him with someone that actually matters.
So despite the fact he legitimately made it to an offline event and did reasonably well, your personal dislike of him means he should be excluded?
He's there for a reason, the reason is he performed in SC2 at a high level. How would replacing him with someone less deserving be reasonable?
It's a skill based ranking system, not a "who do we like who's also doing well" ranking system. If you want to make a ladder which excludes random people, make your own, otherwise what's the point in making an overall ranking if you are just going to pick and choose who is included.
|
May i inquire on what grounds is combatex ranked 7th, when in fact he can't win versus anyone decent, he never did won versus anyone decent and he has no tournament results whatsoever?
Also where is Taeja QQ
|
On December 27 2012 22:29 GGzerG wrote:
I think you should just remove CombatEX from the rankings all together since he is not even allowed on this website , it is pretty pointless to even have him in the rankings IMO, just move on to the next person please, wouldn't be hard to replace him with someone that actually matters.
Out of all people on this forum.... YOU are the one who calls for someone to be banished... I agree that CombatEX wasn't a good person but I can't help but rofl at the irony here. ^^
Great work as always, BB. Interesting to see XlorD so high up in the foreigner ranking. Guy's definitely got the talent to make it happen, we'll have to see how much consistency there is to him.
|
6 of the top 10 koreans are zerg.
7 of the top 10 foreigners are zerg.
Leading by far 
Hopefully this would be rectified in HotS!
|
On December 27 2012 22:30 Lonyo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2012 22:29 GGzerG wrote:
I think you should just remove CombatEX from the rankings all together since he is not even allowed on this website , it is pretty pointless to even have him in the rankings IMO, just move on to the next person please, wouldn't be hard to replace him with someone that actually matters. So despite the fact he legitimately made it to an offline event and did reasonably well, your personal dislike of him means he should be excluded? He's there for a reason, the reason is he performed in SC2 at a high level. How would replacing him with someone less deserving be reasonable? It's a skill based ranking system, not a "who do we like who's also doing well" ranking system. If you want to make a ladder which excludes random people, make your own, otherwise what's the point in making an overall ranking if you are just going to pick and choose who is included.
I agree, if CombadEX had a good run and was legit he should be recognized.
I don't see any problem with this. People envolve, so should the Team Liquid as a society, don't act wrong based on some poor behaviours of some individuals. Yes, he was indeed very incorrect and had a tremendous lack of respect for people, but all people get better and envolve... but that is another discussion.
Merry X-mas to you all 
|
just because someone is not a welcome person on the site does not take away from his accomplishments, look at it from a objective point of view
|
On December 27 2012 22:29 GGzerG wrote:
I think you should just remove CombatEX from the rankings all together since he is not even allowed on this website , it is pretty pointless to even have him in the rankings IMO, just move on to the next person please, wouldn't be hard to replace him with someone that actually matters.
He played in a tournament and got his ranking from there, so he should be on the list, even if the ranking might not be very accurate on his part.
I don't think the list accurately shows who the top players are, but I will agree that it is like a snap-shot of current shape for the most part, although I still think some rankings are "wrong", if you can say so.
|
On December 27 2012 22:35 theBALLS wrote:6 of the top 10 koreans are zerg. 7 of the top 10 foreigners are zerg. Leading by far Hopefully this would be rectified in HotS!
happens when you don´t patch your games.
|
On December 27 2012 22:32 edlover420 wrote:
May i inquire on what grounds is combatex ranked 7th, when in fact he can't win versus anyone decent, he never did won versus anyone decent and he has no tournament results whatsoever?
Also where is Taeja QQ
I agree that he's not that good a player but his sample size, although limited, includes wins over d.KiLLeR, rox.fraer, M.Adelscott and a map win against PartinG. So he has beaten some progamers that you and me both would classify as "definitely better", the issue is that there's so few games of him at all, and this is not going to change since he has retired. But his winrate in TLPD is 71.43%, or 10/14. That's a fact :/
|
Pretty sad that only PartinG and HerO manage to get into the top 10 of current protoss players.
|
20 players, 3 terran, 4 protoss.....13 zerg...
Nice ranking though!
|
Startale too stronk! :D
Lol combatex.
Thanks theBB.
|
Wait didn't both Adelscott and Lowely go farther than Combatex at WCG? If WCG is the basis of his ranking how can you put him above both of them? This makes no sense at all rofl.
|
Also Grubby's IEM win counts less than combatex's wcg group stage?
|
On December 27 2012 22:40 goswser wrote:
Wait didn't both Adelscott and Lowely go farther than Combatex at WCG? If WCG is the basis of his ranking how can you put him above both of them? This makes no sense at all rofl.
Because there was already information about Adelscott and Lowely prior to WCG. CombatEX was a blank. His rating is 100% based on his WCG run, whereas the ratings of Adelscott and Lowely are also based on hundreds of other games they have played.
I wouldn't worry about him. In a month and a half he will drop out of the list on account of no games played.
|
On December 27 2012 22:40 goswser wrote:
Wait didn't both Adelscott and Lowely go farther than Combatex at WCG? If WCG is the basis of his ranking how can you put him above both of them? This makes no sense at all rofl.
I believe that taking a map from parting (which only combatex and macsed managed to do) is worth more elo than a high finish rank.
Also, gl for HyperX tournament, whenever it might be played
|
|
|
All that's fine and dandy, except that SC2 is abandonware at this point.
Asking Blizzard to balance the races is like asking ID software to go back and fix an achievement glitch in Doom 1.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On December 27 2012 22:40 goswser wrote:
Wait didn't both Adelscott and Lowely go farther than Combatex at WCG? If WCG is the basis of his ranking how can you put him above both of them? This makes no sense at all rofl.
I'd say that CombatEx's high ranking is because he
a) Won against a few good players. And more importantly
b) Did not subsequently lose against anyone (apart from a very good Korean). Or, in other words, he doesn't play regularly in tournaments that matter like the other players, so his ranking won't go down.
That also means he'll vanish from the ranking due to inactivity soon enough, though, so no worries.
|
would love to see combatex to play more and see how good his skill actually is.
The game he played against parting were actually pretty close
|
On December 27 2012 22:43 TheBB wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2012 22:40 goswser wrote:
Wait didn't both Adelscott and Lowely go farther than Combatex at WCG? If WCG is the basis of his ranking how can you put him above both of them? This makes no sense at all rofl. Because there was already information about Adelscott and Lowely prior to WCG. CombatEX was a blank. His rating is 100% based on his WCG run, whereas the ratings of Adelscott and Lowely are also based on hundreds of other games they have played. I wouldn't worry about him. In a month and a half he will drop out of the list on account of no games played.
Wouldn't it be better to put a minimum games played requirement to avoid things like this? Combatex takes away credibility from the rankings in most people's eyes, I imagine.
|
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
TT MKP haha no longer highest peak ever
|
On December 27 2012 22:39 iAmJeffReY wrote:
20 players, 3 terran, 4 protoss.....13 zerg...
Nice ranking though!
"Based on our data, it is perfectly balanced"--- David Kim, Blizzard Entertainment.
|
Is it possible to filter your ranking to remove koreans ?
|
On December 27 2012 23:04 ganil wrote:
Is it possible to filter your ranking to remove koreans ?
I don't condone genocide.
(Seriously, no it's not. Yet.)
|
On December 27 2012 22:32 edlover420 wrote:
May i inquire on what grounds is combatex ranked 7th, when in fact he can't win versus anyone decent, he never did won versus anyone decent and he has no tournament results whatsoever?
Also where is Taeja QQ
The system is explained in detail here: http://aligulac.com/faq/
This is purely statistical and has no "wow" factor to spice the rankings, you have power ranks for that.
|
StarTale is pretty good <3 Life, Bomber and PartinG are my trinity force.
|
CombatEX highest rated foreign protoss?
That's great, about time the God of Protoss got some recognition!
|
On December 27 2012 22:43 TheBB wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2012 22:40 goswser wrote:
Wait didn't both Adelscott and Lowely go farther than Combatex at WCG? If WCG is the basis of his ranking how can you put him above both of them? This makes no sense at all rofl. Because there was already information about Adelscott and Lowely prior to WCG. CombatEX was a blank. His rating is 100% based on his WCG run, whereas the ratings of Adelscott and Lowely are also based on hundreds of other games they have played. I wouldn't worry about him. In a month and a half he will drop out of the list on account of no games played.
I have to question your ranking system if this is the case, I don't think this is a very old representation of anything if that's how it's done
|
its getting to the point where i think we will see the community go into a huge crisis soon over the current balance issues with zerg. Its been far too long, no excuses blizzard they have fucked up so much this year.
|
Nice work as usual, TheBB! This deserves more shoutouts and attention
One wish I have, for helping with FPL: having a section that is showing predictions for upcoming Proleague matches. Probably a lot of people would use it for matches of the more unknown players , for trading etc.
On December 27 2012 22:49 jdsowa wrote:
All that's fine and dandy, except that SC2 is abandonware at this point.
Asking Blizzard to balance the races is like asking ID software to go back and fix an achievement glitch in Doom 1.
With the last update being dated December 4th, do you even believe this nonsense yourself? No? Why do you expect anybody else to believe it then? How is Destiny doing, btw? Go back under your bridge, troll!
|
On December 27 2012 23:25 MateShade wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2012 22:43 TheBB wrote:On December 27 2012 22:40 goswser wrote:
Wait didn't both Adelscott and Lowely go farther than Combatex at WCG? If WCG is the basis of his ranking how can you put him above both of them? This makes no sense at all rofl. Because there was already information about Adelscott and Lowely prior to WCG. CombatEX was a blank. His rating is 100% based on his WCG run, whereas the ratings of Adelscott and Lowely are also based on hundreds of other games they have played. I wouldn't worry about him. In a month and a half he will drop out of the list on account of no games played. I have to question your ranking system if this is the case, I don't think this is a very old representation of anything if that's how it's done
Not sure I understand your problem. I'm not trying to get "old" representations.
Adelscott and Lowely play lots of games all the time. That means our current information about them is pretty up to date. On the other hand, there is a new player (CombatEX) about whom we know nothing at all. Then, WCG happens and all of them do really well. So we have:
– Adelscott, we're fairly sure he's a middling player (1184 +/- 115), but he did pretty well at WCG (performed at about 1600 level).
– Lowely, we're fairly sure he's pretty good (1682 +/- 77), and he did pretty well at WCG (performed at maybe ~2000 level if we include a few other games he played in that period).
– CombatEX, we have no information about him (1000 +/- 600), and he also did pretty well at WCG (maybe about 2200?).
Adelscott's and Lowely's ratings are then adjusted upwards somewhat, weighted by the confidence we have in their current rating (as indicated by the +/- numbers), and the consistency of their performances at WCG (which I don't save anywhere so I can't say for sure). Same with CombatEX, except we have essentially no confidence whatsoever in his current rating of 1000. For this reason, his rating adjusts quicker than that of Adelscott and Lowely.
|
As combat ex I would always play exactly 1 series the day before i get kicked out of the list, and just to feed the ridiculous amount of trolls in this forum.
|
What is the whole CombatEX story?
|
70% Zerg... Is it just me or is there a patern emerging?!?
![[image loading]](http://img829.imageshack.us/img829/7821/bisu.png)
User was warned for this post
|
will post my top 30 foreigner ranking later today, your ranking are a new inspriation for me 
and no, combatEX wont be part of the list :D
|
On December 28 2012 01:01 KalWarkov wrote:will post my top 30 foreigner ranking later today, your ranking are a new inspriation for me and no, combatEX wont be part of the list :D
Even though he probably belongs on the top 30 list?
Of course if you want to be blaintatly biased go ahead this guy at least tried.
|
Brunei Darussalam566 Posts
Keep up the good work, the BB, this rating system is awesome and you're doing a great job of keeping it updated.
Cheers!
Oh, and no reason to remove CombatEX from the list as some people suggested. After all, it's a rating system with objective parameters, and removing him artificially will just skew the whole thing over.
|
Norway25712 Posts
Ayy, shoutout!
Awesome. I've started adding TeSL results to the db, will also be adding ASL and NSL. Asian scene deserves to be on here. Also, SaSe plays for Gama Bears now, so that's another good reason to add teSL results :>
|
The only reason Combat made it to China is that he finish 2nd in a tournement and the one who whoop his ass had personnals issue and coulnt attend to the tournement... He had a nice run in China nonetheless but didn't even qualify by the big door ( winning a small LAN in MonTreaL was too much for the guy.
|
how is protoss the lagging race and not terran? there are less terrans lol
|
The foreigner list is quite weird... Where's Naniwa for example, he's definitely one of the top protoss players, not only in foreign scene but also very good vs koreans.
|
On December 28 2012 07:40 Adonminus wrote:
The foreigner list is quite weird... Where's Naniwa for example, he's definitely one of the top protoss players, not only in foreign scene but also very good vs koreans.
He's at 1802 right behind goswser (go you!) and elfi.
|
On December 28 2012 07:39 PrAeToR.FeNiX wrote:
The only reason Combat made it to China is that he finish 2nd in a tournement and the one who whoop his ass had personnals issue and coulnt attend to the tournement... He had a nice run in China nonetheless but didn't even qualify by the big door ( winning a small LAN in MonTreaL was too much for the guy.
The list should have a modifier for 'deserving'. Perhaps multiply by the number of posts in their fan club and then subtract for being invited to a tournament instead of qualifying?
|
"Who is the best foreigner protoss right now?"
"CombatEX!"
"lol"
|
Glad to see I'm contributing to the community beyond my useless posts
Atta boy HyuN, fifth place ain't so bad.
|
On December 28 2012 01:05 thezanursic wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 01:01 KalWarkov wrote:will post my top 30 foreigner ranking later today, your ranking are a new inspriation for me and no, combatEX wont be part of the list :D Even though he probably belongs on the top 30 list? Of course if you want to be blaintatly biased go ahead this guy at least tried.
CombatEX top 30 foreigner?
Good troll, 10/10
|
On December 28 2012 07:50 Solarsail wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 07:39 PrAeToR.FeNiX wrote:
The only reason Combat made it to China is that he finish 2nd in a tournement and the one who whoop his ass had personnals issue and coulnt attend to the tournement... He had a nice run in China nonetheless but didn't even qualify by the big door ( winning a small LAN in MonTreaL was too much for the guy. The list should have a modifier for 'deserving'. Perhaps multiply by the number of posts in their fan club and then subtract for being invited to a tournament instead of qualifying?
Not sure if troll or just silly..
|
|
|
how can a guy with a 2-7 record be on spot 19 :>
|
|
|
some of these dont make sense,
also life 3203 vs terran lol
|
lol people..stop freaking out...when there is less data a players ranking is more volatile
For example, If I (an unknown player), were to play 1 match against Life and took 1 game in a BO3, then my ranking would be in the 2000's....why? because that is the only data there is for me....doesn't mean I am one of the best foreigners, it simply means that there is a little amount of data on me and I performed better than predicted..
IE, as more data comes in for players, like combatex, you will see a dramatic change in his rating (closer to the actual)...not to say he shouldnt be where he is, but he hasn't really proven he deserves it yet with only 1 tournament of data (something the equation doesnt take into consideration)
|
Norway25712 Posts
I do believe that players with very few games get some sort of "placeholder" matches so that the rating doesn't skyrocket. You wouldn't be in youre 2000s if you beat Life, in other words. But yeah, fewer games = you'll probably move up and down real fast, rating will change drastically.
|
Aw yeah, Lucifron, holding it down for the foreign Terrans.
|
On December 27 2012 22:29 GGzerG wrote:
I think you should just remove CombatEX from the rankings all together since he is not even allowed on this website , it is pretty pointless to even have him in the rankings IMO, just move on to the next person please, wouldn't be hard to replace him with someone that actually matters.
How about we let the real players just outperform him. If they can, put them on, if they can't, he should stay. Rankings should be based on playing right? Not attitude or place in the community.
|
|
|
On December 27 2012 22:37 FinestHour wrote:
just because someone is not a welcome person on the site does not take away from his accomplishments, look at it from a objective point of view
which is why his liquipedia page was taken down, right? :\
I don't expect him being able to just jump right on back into the progaming scene due to his history, but with the effort he's shown, he should at least be given a chance. Scarlett plays him often on her stream, and he puts up a good fight, and even wins most of them(or at least, of the 4 matches that I've seen).
Also I think we should support anyone who isn't playing zerg these days 
|
|
|
I miss the days when  Kas was at the top of all the foreigner rankings.
|
One of the problems I see with this ranking is that it values weekend tournaments such as MLG too highly.
The reason why is because these weekend tournaments have tons of games against highly ranked tournaments, and I don't necessarily believe that this should be valued more highly than a league-format (GSL). Also, weekend tournaments are way more violate than longer leagues such as GSL because of the lack of preparation.
GSL is more prestigious than any other tournament right now (arguably), and it's not because of the prize pool (MLG, IPL, DreamHack, WCS, NASL, these tournaments have comparable prize pools). GSL is prestigious because it's filled with the absolute best players in the world and it allows you to prepare for your next opponent, so you cannot be randomly knocked out simply because you are too tired to play. Prestige is actually an important factor to consider because players will take it more seriously.
For example, 4-time GSL champion Mvp will be playing to his peak in the GSL Finals. However, in an IPTL match against FXO, will he really be trying as hard? The answer is clearly no, Mvp (and LG-IM) would rather conserve his wrists.
Is there an unbiased way to accommodate prestige into the rankings? No, but it's something to think about. Leenock beating Mvp in some online team league will be valued at a certain level. Leenock beating Mvp in a Bo3 in some online tournament will be valued higher. Leenock beating Mvp in a Bo3 series in the GSL group stages will mean something more. Leenock beating Mvp in GSL, 3-2, the day after they both flew in from NA is meaningful. Leenock beating Mvp 4-3 in the GSL finals after 2 weeks of preparation means far more.
|
On December 28 2012 09:37 Iodem wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2012 22:37 FinestHour wrote:
just because someone is not a welcome person on the site does not take away from his accomplishments, look at it from a objective point of view which is why his liquipedia page was taken down, right? :\ I don't expect him being able to just jump right on back into the progaming scene due to his history, but with the effort he's shown, he should at least be given a chance. Scarlett plays him often on her stream, and he puts up a good fight, and even wins most of them(or at least, of the 4 matches that I've seen). Also I think we should support anyone who isn't playing zerg these days
His liquipedia page has nothing to do with his accomplishments, since anyone from the TL staff, who hates him, can delete it, doesn't matter how many tournaments he wins.
He can go to progaming if he wants to. All he needs to do is work hard. Just because he can't post on this site, it doesn't make him less skilled.
|
On December 28 2012 10:37 Hoon wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 09:37 Iodem wrote:On December 27 2012 22:37 FinestHour wrote:
just because someone is not a welcome person on the site does not take away from his accomplishments, look at it from a objective point of view which is why his liquipedia page was taken down, right? :\ I don't expect him being able to just jump right on back into the progaming scene due to his history, but with the effort he's shown, he should at least be given a chance. Scarlett plays him often on her stream, and he puts up a good fight, and even wins most of them(or at least, of the 4 matches that I've seen). Also I think we should support anyone who isn't playing zerg these days His liquipedia page has nothing to do with his accomplishments, since anyone from the TL staff, who hates him, can delete it, doesn't matter how many tournaments he wins. He can go to progaming if he wants to. All he needs to do is work hard. Just because he can't post on this site, it doesn't make him less skilled.
His main disadvantage is his stream isn't featured on TL, which would hurt his teamless income from ads.
Of course, you could just try to get him upvoted on Reddit.
|
These rankings make me sad
|
On December 27 2012 22:32 edlover420 wrote:
May i inquire on what grounds is combatex ranked 7th, when in fact he can't win versus anyone decent, he never did won versus anyone decent and he has no tournament results whatsoever?
Also where is Taeja QQ
He took a game off Parting. Did you take a game off Parting?
|
|
|
On December 28 2012 10:40 Iodem wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 10:37 Hoon wrote:On December 28 2012 09:37 Iodem wrote:On December 27 2012 22:37 FinestHour wrote:
just because someone is not a welcome person on the site does not take away from his accomplishments, look at it from a objective point of view which is why his liquipedia page was taken down, right? :\ I don't expect him being able to just jump right on back into the progaming scene due to his history, but with the effort he's shown, he should at least be given a chance. Scarlett plays him often on her stream, and he puts up a good fight, and even wins most of them(or at least, of the 4 matches that I've seen). Also I think we should support anyone who isn't playing zerg these days His liquipedia page has nothing to do with his accomplishments, since anyone from the TL staff, who hates him, can delete it, doesn't matter how many tournaments he wins. He can go to progaming if he wants to. All he needs to do is work hard. Just because he can't post on this site, it doesn't make him less skilled. His main disadvantage is his stream isn't featured on TL, which would hurt his teamless income from ads. Of course, you could just try to get him upvoted on Reddit.
You don't become a progamer by getting twitch ads. You do it by winning games.
There are so many good players out there that win tournaments but don't stream.
And I don't think team owners are childish enough to not sign him because of his "past".
|
Hero below Baby looks like a real joke to me .
No, not because im a die hard Liquidhero fan
|
Please, everyone who haven't taken the time to learn how this rating system works, go read up on it.
EZ Read
Pro Read
The more games we have of anyone on record, the more certain we are of their level/rating. That is how statistics work.
We are updating the site with as many games as possible from as many tournaments as possible, on that note, if you are running a minor/not so public tournament but want us to include the games played, plz feel free to msg me with the results as well as the dates the games were played and I will add them. Please not very old tournaments since it gets really hard to see if those are already added due to the buttload of loads from other sites which aren't properly named.
The more games are played, the more results are gathered, the better/more accurate the ranking gets. Simple as that.
Also to the people hating on CombatEX's ranking, he is ranked high, because even though everyone thinks he's satan, he beat some pretty good players, and there were no games of him in the database, meaning that we currently have the simple assumption that he is pretty fucking good. (And no he is not discriminated because of his history, this is statistics not politics)
Now 3 things will either happen,
1: He will continue to play in tournaments and beat good players and thus rise to the level of SC2 god.
2: He will continue to play in tournaments and lose to good players and thus fall in ranking.
3: We will see no games from him in 4 weeks and he will automatically be removed from the list.
|
Yeah, what he^ said, basically.
On December 28 2012 10:42 MarkCJ wrote:
Do thé points decay?
No, but two things happen. First, the certainty decays, which means ratings will change quicker when an inactive player returns to the scene. Second, a player with no games for two months is removed from the list. His entry and rating remains, but it's just not listed.
On December 28 2012 10:26 Entirety wrote:+ Show Spoiler +One of the problems I see with this ranking is that it values weekend tournaments such as MLG too highly.
The reason why is because these weekend tournaments have tons of games against highly ranked tournaments, and I don't necessarily believe that this should be valued more highly than a league-format (GSL). Also, weekend tournaments are way more violate than longer leagues such as GSL because of the lack of preparation.
GSL is more prestigious than any other tournament right now (arguably), and it's not because of the prize pool (MLG, IPL, DreamHack, WCS, NASL, these tournaments have comparable prize pools). GSL is prestigious because it's filled with the absolute best players in the world and it allows you to prepare for your next opponent, so you cannot be randomly knocked out simply because you are too tired to play. Prestige is actually an important factor to consider because players will take it more seriously.
For example, 4-time GSL champion Mvp will be playing to his peak in the GSL Finals. However, in an IPTL match against FXO, will he really be trying as hard? The answer is clearly no, Mvp (and LG-IM) would rather conserve his wrists.
Is there an unbiased way to accommodate prestige into the rankings? No, but it's something to think about. Leenock beating Mvp in some online team league will be valued at a certain level. Leenock beating Mvp in a Bo3 in some online tournament will be valued higher. Leenock beating Mvp in a Bo3 series in the GSL group stages will mean something more. Leenock beating Mvp in GSL, 3-2, the day after they both flew in from NA is meaningful. Leenock beating Mvp 4-3 in the GSL finals after 2 weeks of preparation means far more.
Yeah, I have thought about it, and I have three reasons not to bother about it, really.
(a) I can't think of a way to reliably measure prestige.
(b) Some of the information you suggest is totally impractical to collect at this stage (and for the foreseeable future). I'm not about to start collecting information about people's travel habits. (And I realise you aren't seriously suggesting this, but still.)
(c) In my personal opinion, if Mvp can only be bothered to really try half the time, then maybe he doesn't deserve a high rating.
Oh, I really want to do teams.
Puts on to-do list.
On December 28 2012 08:13 krutopatkin wrote:
how can a guy with a 2-7 record be on spot 19 :>
He is 9-8. If you wonder why he is on spot 19 (among foreigners, I might add), the information is there for everyone to see. No need to look it up in TLPD when I have the data that I use right on the damn site.
Here: http://aligulac.com/players/415/period/64/
Then here: http://aligulac.com/players/415/period/70/
Then here: http://aligulac.com/players/415/period/73/
On December 28 2012 07:40 SlixSC wrote:
how is protoss the lagging race and not terran? there are less terrans lol
http://aligulac.com/periods/74/
There are six Terrans before the third Protoss.
|
On December 28 2012 09:37 Iodem wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2012 22:37 FinestHour wrote:
just because someone is not a welcome person on the site does not take away from his accomplishments, look at it from a objective point of view which is why his liquipedia page was taken down, right? :\ I don't expect him being able to just jump right on back into the progaming scene due to his history, but with the effort he's shown, he should at least be given a chance. Scarlett plays him often on her stream, and he puts up a good fight, and even wins most of them(or at least, of the 4 matches that I've seen). Also I think we should support anyone who isn't playing zerg these days
We've given him his Liquipedia page back.
|
France12790 Posts
On December 28 2012 10:42 GolemMadness wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2012 22:32 edlover420 wrote:
May i inquire on what grounds is combatex ranked 7th, when in fact he can't win versus anyone decent, he never did won versus anyone decent and he has no tournament results whatsoever?
Also where is Taeja QQ He took a game off Parting. Did you take a game off Parting?
Another proof that PvP is random.
This list is even funnier than ELO, too many flaws to be meaningful.
|
On December 28 2012 22:31 Poopi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 10:42 GolemMadness wrote:On December 27 2012 22:32 edlover420 wrote:
May i inquire on what grounds is combatex ranked 7th, when in fact he can't win versus anyone decent, he never did won versus anyone decent and he has no tournament results whatsoever?
Also where is Taeja QQ He took a game off Parting. Did you take a game off Parting? Another proof that PvP is random. This list is even funnier than ELO, too many flaws to be meaningful.
The flaw lies not in the statistics, it lies in your interpretation of it.
|
You have players like Gumiho, Flash, and Nobelesse (who have won nothing in SC2) ranked ahead of 4 time GSL champion Mvp. Something doesn't seem right.
|
On December 28 2012 23:08 Salient wrote:
You have players like Gumiho, Flash, and Nobelesse (who have won nothing in SC2) ranked ahead of 4 time GSL champion Mvp. Something doesn't seem right.
It's probably current skills then overall I bet.
|
On December 28 2012 23:10 Gladiator333 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 23:08 Salient wrote:
You have players like Gumiho, Flash, and Nobelesse (who have won nothing in SC2) ranked ahead of 4 time GSL champion Mvp. Something doesn't seem right. It's probably current skills then overall I bet.
Nobelesse and Flash would not beat Mvp. The rankings are worthless.
|
Current skill, I am certain Flash would beat Mvp because of Mvp's wrists. Nobelesse, not so much.
|
Sorry but if I look at this list I have to say that this system is as dumb and meaningless as TLPD. It works if you have one competition in a single country. But not in the globally imbalanced situation we have now. The skill of the opponents changes way way too much.
|
I don't trust this ranking system, I guess it ranks players too quickly despite some having shown a low number of games.
It would probably be better if it was some bayesian estimate or the K value would be lower so it would take longer to reach high ranks.
A player like combatex is probably ranked highly because he played few ranked games and did quite well in the most recent ones.
Of course this is just conjecture since I didn't go through the data but the foreigner list just feels off
|
XLorD #9 foreigner!!!! nice :D
|
I think combatex is up there because of how often he cheeses (and how damn good he is at it. Seriously, that shit is ridiculous.)
|
On December 28 2012 23:27 jermmanDOTA wrote:
I think combatex is up there because of how often he cheeses (and how damn good he is at it. Seriously, that shit is ridiculous.)
No he's there because he placed top 8 at WCG. This system can't magically tell your play unless it has tournament results to back it up.
|
I can't take any list that ranks Combatex and MacSed as the two top foreign protoss seriously.
I can't even fathom what type of alghoritm is used here, how is Grubby not above them considering his recent IEM win, and same for BabyK @ wcs, this whole topic just seems like a giant flamebait :S
|
I'm surprised to see MVP is not there
|
On December 28 2012 23:44 Nihilnovi wrote:
I can't take any list that ranks Combatex and MacSed as the two top foreign protoss seriously.
I can't even fathom what type of alghoritm is used here, how is Grubby not above them considering his recent IEM win, and same for BabyK @ wcs, this whole topic just seems like a giant flamebait :S
Grubby didn't win IEM.
|
On December 28 2012 23:44 Nihilnovi wrote:
I can't take any list that ranks Combatex and MacSed as the two top foreign protoss seriously.
I can't even fathom what type of alghoritm is used here, how is Grubby not above them considering his recent IEM win, and same for BabyK @ wcs, this whole topic just seems like a giant flamebait :S
what i've learned from this thread so far is people don't understand statistics.
|
The problem seems to be that it doesn't apply the correct weight to various wins. The fact that MC was #2 in a recent GSL and #3 at OSL should put him in the top 25 players despite his otherwise slumping results. Conversely, the recent top 10 performances by CombatEX at a few tournaments s not really that impressive.
|
On December 28 2012 23:57 Corrosive wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 23:44 Nihilnovi wrote:
I can't take any list that ranks Combatex and MacSed as the two top foreign protoss seriously.
I can't even fathom what type of alghoritm is used here, how is Grubby not above them considering his recent IEM win, and same for BabyK @ wcs, this whole topic just seems like a giant flamebait :S what i've learned from this thread so far is people don't understand statistics.
Yup we like our rankings to be an accurate representation of a player's skill, and somewhat realistic. This "ranking" just further proves that statistics are completely overrated.
|
On December 29 2012 00:33 Salient wrote:
The problem seems to be that it doesn't apply the correct weight to various wins. The fact that MC was #2 in a recent GSL and #3 at OSL should put him in the top 25 players despite his otherwise slumping results. Conversely, the recent top 10 performances by CombatEX at a few tournaments s not really that impressive.
The ranking does not weight any games, as there's no automatic (and sensible) way to do so.
|
Any ranking system that places CombatEX above MC is ridiculous. MC won multiple major tournaments and took home well over 100 thousand dollars this year. CombatEX? Not so much.
|
On December 29 2012 00:33 Salient wrote:
The problem seems to be that it doesn't apply the correct weight to various wins. The fact that MC was #2 in a recent GSL and #3 at OSL should put him in the top 25 players despite his otherwise slumping results. Conversely, the recent top 10 performances by CombatEX at a few tournaments s not really that impressive.
On December 28 2012 23:44 Nihilnovi wrote:
I can't take any list that ranks Combatex and MacSed as the two top foreign protoss seriously.
I can't even fathom what type of alghoritm is used here, how is Grubby not above them considering his recent IEM win, and same for BabyK @ wcs, this whole topic just seems like a giant flamebait :S
Please TRY at least to understand it.
Do You Weigh Games Differently?
No, I don't. Korean tournaments and players receive no special treatment. The GSL is difficult because good players play there; the players aren't good because they play in the GSL.
The more data we have describing a player, the more we can expect them to play at their given rating. Since both CombatEx and MacSeed aren't that well documented, it still "surprises" the model when they perform well, meaning that the model will think they are better than they are. When we receive more and more information about players, we will have a more accurate representation of a players true skill level on a pretty current level.
Winning tournaments does NOT give you a higher rating, beating higher ranked players does. (Which you usually do to win a tournament, but it takes wins, not "overall wins")
|
On December 29 2012 00:51 Salient wrote:
Any ranking system that places CombatEX above MC is ridiculous. MC won multiple major tournaments and took home well over 100 thousand dollars this year. CombatEX? Not so much.
That particular problem will fix itself. Promised.
|
That's why you don't rank players at all until you have sufficient data to rank them in a meaningful manner.
|
5003 Posts
For the results ticker, I'd add in some variable for "offline" play or whether or not players are playing from the same region, just to see how much lag effects "skill". would be something interesting to see. (so EU vs EU matches are fine, but EU vs NA matches would have this flag, etc)
|
On December 29 2012 00:54 Salient wrote:
That's why you don't rank players at all until you have sufficient data to rank them in a meaningful manner.
So please define the sufficient amount of games played before we can rank a player? What about the already ranked player the unranked player played, how would he have points assigned?
|
On December 29 2012 00:55 Milkis wrote:
For the results ticker, I'd add in some variable for "offline" play or whether or not players are playing from the same region, just to see how much lag effects "skill". would be something interesting to see. (so EU vs EU matches are fine, but EU vs NA matches would have this flag, etc)
Would require an entire rework of the way results are currently added.
Maybe it can be done when we "start" fresh with HoTS
|
|
|
5003 Posts
On December 29 2012 00:56 Grovbolle wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2012 00:55 Milkis wrote:
For the results ticker, I'd add in some variable for "offline" play or whether or not players are playing from the same region, just to see how much lag effects "skill". would be something interesting to see. (so EU vs EU matches are fine, but EU vs NA matches would have this flag, etc)
Would require an entire rework of the way results are currently added. Maybe it can be done when we "start" fresh with HoTS
Sure, but it'd probably be the best step forward when we're talking about actively measuring "skill"
|
On December 29 2012 01:00 Milkis wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2012 00:56 Grovbolle wrote:On December 29 2012 00:55 Milkis wrote:
For the results ticker, I'd add in some variable for "offline" play or whether or not players are playing from the same region, just to see how much lag effects "skill". would be something interesting to see. (so EU vs EU matches are fine, but EU vs NA matches would have this flag, etc)
Would require an entire rework of the way results are currently added. Maybe it can be done when we "start" fresh with HoTS Sure, but it'd probably be the best step forward when we're talking about actively measuring "skill"
I'll suggest it to TheBB (Although he'll prolly read this thread pretty soon )
|
The ranking system is only useful if it is predictive. Is Baby really the 6th best player in the world at the moment? Would you confidently predict that he would consistently beat MC, Mvp, and Taeja? If not, your ranking system is not really useful at all.
|
On December 29 2012 01:05 Salient wrote:
The ranking system is only useful if it is predictive. Is Baby really the 6th best player in the world at the moment? Would you confidently predict that he would consistently beat MC, Mvp, and Taeja? If not, your ranking system is not really useful at all.
I agree. But you can't just say that: "Before anyone has beaten at least 100 players, we won't acknowledge what he does".
Let's see if this won't be even more useful once HoTS hits and the board is wiped clean
|
On December 29 2012 01:05 Salient wrote:
The ranking system is only useful if it is predictive. Is Baby really the 6th best player in the world at the moment? Would you confidently predict that he would consistently beat MC, Mvp, and Taeja? If not, your ranking system is not really useful at all.
The funny thing is that the ranking system is extremely good at predicting matches. I let the site predict the playoff matches of the recent GSL Blizzard Cup, and it correctly guessed 4 of the 5 matchups, including a 4-2 win of Life over Parting. Go ahead, you can try it out yourself at http://aligulac.com/predict/match/
Yes, there are oddities in the rating, and there always will be. No rating is perfect, especially not in a game with so many random elements as Starcraft 2. But as far as ranking systems go, this one is pretty damn impressive.
|
On December 29 2012 01:15 Conti wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2012 01:05 Salient wrote:
The ranking system is only useful if it is predictive. Is Baby really the 6th best player in the world at the moment? Would you confidently predict that he would consistently beat MC, Mvp, and Taeja? If not, your ranking system is not really useful at all. The funny thing is that the ranking system is extremely good at predicting matches. I let the site predict the playoff matches of the recent GSL Blizzard Cup, and it correctly guessed 4 of the 5 matchups, including a 4-2 win of Life over Parting. Go ahead, you can try it out yourself at http://aligulac.com/predict/match/Yes, there are oddities in the rating, and there always will be. No rating is perfect, especially not in a game with so many random elements as Starcraft 2. But as far as ranking systems go, this one is pretty damn impressive.
Also did 7/8 at Homestory cup RO16
|
On December 29 2012 01:05 Salient wrote:
The ranking system is only useful if it is predictive.
I'm getting tired of this. The whole idea behind the system was to make it predictive.
Behold. This is a plot of almost 50k historical games. On the horizontal axis you find predicted winrate for the presumed stronger player, using the ratings at the time the game was played. The games were grouped in reasonably small groups, i.e. 50%-53.3% and so on. (Obviously no numbers below 50 since this is the predicted winrate for the stronger player. It also only goes up to about 75 because there are very few games past that.)
On the vertical axis is the actual winrate for each group.
As can be plainly seen cough, cough, the actual winrate is close to the predicted winrate or, in some cases, higher.
Now I'm no statistician, and honestly I don't know how to do a proper prediction test, but it looks fucking damnable good to me.
Things this rating is not:
- a ranking of player's past achievements. If you want that, count medals and winnings.
- a people's award. If you want that you can make a poll.
Things this rating is:
- a ranking of who would probably win in a hypothetical game played right now.
I'm happy that these threads generate some controversy and discussion, but it would really be nice if I didn't have to explain the same thing 500 times.
|
So you really think Baby (Code A player) is the 6th best player in the world at the moment? Very unlikely.
|
On December 29 2012 04:43 Salient wrote:
So you really think Baby (Code A player) is the 6th best player in the world at the moment? Very unlikely.
Do I really think that? The (presumably) sentient human being TheBB? Does he think that Baby is the 6th best player in the world?
Nowhere did I say that.
What I can say is that if I had no information about Baby other than his past results, and that if I were to pit every Starcraft 2 player in the world against a random and fairly uniform assortment of opponents, Baby might possibly (with a probability that I could estimate, but I won't because this is ridiculous) have a winrate that only five others could beat.
However, the sentient human being TheBB knows more about Baby than that, and he can possibly make a better judgement. Things I know about Baby that the rating system does not include such interesting information as his team status, nationality, probable training regime, friendships with other progamers, and so on.
Do I, the sentient human being TheBB, think that you are underestimating Baby? For sure.
It's like you didn't even read my post, let alone the FAQ on the site.
Edit: I just realized you are literally behind almost every single complaint on the last two pages. That makes me feel a lot better about things.
|
On December 29 2012 04:43 Salient wrote:
So you really think Baby (Code A player) is the 6th best player in the world at the moment? Very unlikely. According to the definition above:
There are only 5 players to be expected to win against baby at this moment. Baby can win, he can lose.
Also, being the best player or not is irrelevant, that's in your head. It's about statistical chances of him winning against an opponent.
|
On December 29 2012 04:52 TheBB wrote:
Edit: I just realized you are literally behind almost every single complaint on the last two pages. That makes me feel a lot better about things.
Don't worry, there's always people complaining as loudly as they can without reading a single explanation or answer. They're bound to appear with threads like these, and they definitely shouldn't get you down. You're doing awesome work here, and the community is all the better for it.
|
Combatex should not be on the list. He is the root of all evil.
WCG should be banned for not banning Combatex.
|
The GSL ratings are superior because they are limited to games between top players. You fail to account for the quality of the games with your statistics 101 class project. More sophisticated models can actually do that (and thus become more powerful), but they become necessarily more subjective. It's a price you need to pay to make the ratings meaningful. It takes a lot of work though. Your system is apparently less subjective and easier to construct, but you get what you pay for.
|
foreigner list seems about right :D just need to add nerchio / + 2 other zergs of the week and remove the non-zerg players
|
The only thing MVP has on Flash is strategy, and thasts because he's an old gen who started a good 1.5 years ahead of him.
Flash is mechanically better at both the macro and micro aspect than MVP. Dont fool yourselves.
|
Flash was the "deity" of another game. We'll see if it carries over. I hope so. Grubby was the king of War 3, but that didn't carry over at all, unfortunately.
|
On December 29 2012 06:10 Salient wrote:
Flash was the "deity" of another game. We'll see if it carries over. I hope so. Grubby was the king of War 3, but that didn't carry over at all, unfortunately.
Madfrog was pretty good as WC3 as well. And Moon was GOD of WC3. And we saw how that turned out.
|
I'm tired of all these people who know nothing about statistics shitting up this thread because they have some conception of what "should" be the right ranking. It doesn't work that way, and eventually the players that "don't deserve" to be ranked so highly will drop off with decreasing performance.
|
This isnt a thread of OPINIONS, but a thread of STATISTICS, how dont people understand that...
|
On December 29 2012 05:39 Salient wrote:
The GSL ratings are superior because they are limited to games between top players. You fail to account for the quality of the games with your statistics 101 class project. More sophisticated models can actually do that (and thus become more powerful), but they become necessarily more subjective. It's a price you need to pay to make the ratings meaningful. It takes a lot of work though. Your system is apparently less subjective and easier to construct, but you get what you pay for.
Please enlighten us with you vast knowledge, because obviously you are some sort of mathematical genius who can quantify subjectivity in a meaningful and objective/useful way.
Also, please define top players.
If you want subjectivity, just read power ranks plz.
|
Effort is 10th because of 3 proleague wins, ha.
|
Good rankings. I think people are viewing this as an absolute power ranking (like an NFL team ranking), but those are inherently subjective. This is nice a little tool to see how people are performing recently; it's not going to show you who's better that who, since that requires a whole host of data (weighting different tourney wins, examining the games themselves, etc) that would be far too time consuming to gather.
There are some people here that don't pass the eye test, but that's the nature of these things. I feel that most people just want some SC2 authority to spout off a power rank and for that power ranking to align with their own personal views.
|
It looks like a lot of people do not understand the idea behind this work. While a lot of them think that whatever is the top 10 on your ranking is what you (TheBB) believe to be the top 10, I do appreciate that it's "just" a result of a consistent application of a statistical algorithm.
I like this work very much. I do not rationally agree with a lot of these rankings (as was mentioned - CombatEX, Mvp and a lot of Kespa players who play only with one another and are linked to the "main pool" of players only via three tournaments [OSL, WCS Korea, MLG v Proleague] - these ratings are far from what I would say "expected"), but it's only yet another tool for enthusiasts to look at.
I miss the events being rated differently. Though I understand the decision (it's easier not to rank, and probably fairer from stats point of view). There might be some room for improvement (or an alternative ranking) where events are weighed - be it by prize money, predefined ranking, or the median skill of competing players. But having this "raw" data where every game counts the same is important as well.
One suggestion: how about publishing the uncertainty of a rating of a given player (both on profile and on the list)?
|
On December 27 2012 22:29 GGzerG wrote:
I think you should just remove CombatEX from the rankings all together since he is not even allowed on this website , it is pretty pointless to even have him in the rankings IMO, just move on to the next person please, wouldn't be hard to replace him with someone that actually matters.
wow lol. this is so stupid
|
On January 04 2013 00:36 THF wrote:
It looks like a lot of people do not understand the idea behind this work. While a lot of them think that whatever is the top 10 on your ranking is what you (TheBB) believe to be the top 10, I do appreciate that it's "just" a result of a consistent application of a statistical algorithm.
I like this work very much. I do not rationally agree with a lot of these rankings (as was mentioned - CombatEX, Mvp and a lot of Kespa players who play only with one another and are linked to the "main pool" of players only via three tournaments [OSL, WCS Korea, MLG v Proleague] - these ratings are far from what I would say "expected"), but it's only yet another tool for enthusiasts to look at.
I miss the events being rated differently. Though I understand the decision (it's easier not to rank, and probably fairer from stats point of view). There might be some room for improvement (or an alternative ranking) where events are weighed - be it by prize money, predefined ranking, or the median skill of competing players. But having this "raw" data where every game counts the same is important as well.
One suggestion: how about publishing the uncertainty of a rating of a given player (both on profile and on the list)?
It is a lot of work just to add games from so many different sources, there aren't "just" GSL, MLG, IPL,DH, IEM, SPL, GSTL, OSL etc. There are also TONS of cups, ASL, NSL, Zotac. Weighing and gathering data which could be used for applying a weight is both time consuming and very subjective.
|
TheBB, could you make a .csv or something available for the latest ratings list? I'd like to play around with it.
|
On January 04 2013 00:51 Grovbolle wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 00:36 THF wrote:
It looks like a lot of people do not understand the idea behind this work. While a lot of them think that whatever is the top 10 on your ranking is what you (TheBB) believe to be the top 10, I do appreciate that it's "just" a result of a consistent application of a statistical algorithm.
I like this work very much. I do not rationally agree with a lot of these rankings (as was mentioned - CombatEX, Mvp and a lot of Kespa players who play only with one another and are linked to the "main pool" of players only via three tournaments [OSL, WCS Korea, MLG v Proleague] - these ratings are far from what I would say "expected"), but it's only yet another tool for enthusiasts to look at.
I miss the events being rated differently. Though I understand the decision (it's easier not to rank, and probably fairer from stats point of view). There might be some room for improvement (or an alternative ranking) where events are weighed - be it by prize money, predefined ranking, or the median skill of competing players. But having this "raw" data where every game counts the same is important as well.
One suggestion: how about publishing the uncertainty of a rating of a given player (both on profile and on the list)? It is a lot of work just to add games from so many different sources, there aren't "just" GSL, MLG, IPL,DH, IEM, SPL, GSTL, OSL etc. There are also TONS of cups, ASL, NSL, Zotac. Weighing and gathering data which could be used for applying a weight is both time consuming and very subjective.
I don't doubt that. As I said, I really appreciate this work - especially as the database of games is pretty much publicly available.
The weighing could be done semi-automatically as well, though, depending on the weighing criteria. Someone would need to try what "works best", and it would definitely be controversial whatever criteria one decides to use. But for example, weighing based on average player rating in a tournament could be fully automatic once implemented, where weighing based on other criteria (money, prestige) would require some more tournament metadata.
Now that I think about it, any sort of tournament-based weighting would require a different rating algorithm than the current one - the current one is "simply" asking "which set of ratings maximises the probability of these real life outcomes" which have already happened, it's an "ex post" algorithm. Something like Elo might be more suited for weighing, where ratings are evaluated continuously, and you can apply "multipliers" to given results.
|
On January 04 2013 21:57 THF wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 00:51 Grovbolle wrote:On January 04 2013 00:36 THF wrote:
It looks like a lot of people do not understand the idea behind this work. While a lot of them think that whatever is the top 10 on your ranking is what you (TheBB) believe to be the top 10, I do appreciate that it's "just" a result of a consistent application of a statistical algorithm.
I like this work very much. I do not rationally agree with a lot of these rankings (as was mentioned - CombatEX, Mvp and a lot of Kespa players who play only with one another and are linked to the "main pool" of players only via three tournaments [OSL, WCS Korea, MLG v Proleague] - these ratings are far from what I would say "expected"), but it's only yet another tool for enthusiasts to look at.
I miss the events being rated differently. Though I understand the decision (it's easier not to rank, and probably fairer from stats point of view). There might be some room for improvement (or an alternative ranking) where events are weighed - be it by prize money, predefined ranking, or the median skill of competing players. But having this "raw" data where every game counts the same is important as well.
One suggestion: how about publishing the uncertainty of a rating of a given player (both on profile and on the list)? It is a lot of work just to add games from so many different sources, there aren't "just" GSL, MLG, IPL,DH, IEM, SPL, GSTL, OSL etc. There are also TONS of cups, ASL, NSL, Zotac. Weighing and gathering data which could be used for applying a weight is both time consuming and very subjective. I don't doubt that. As I said, I really appreciate this work - especially as the database of games is pretty much publicly available. The weighing could be done semi-automatically as well, though, depending on the weighing criteria. Someone would need to try what "works best", and it would definitely be controversial whatever criteria one decides to use. But for example, weighing based on average player rating in a tournament could be fully automatic once implemented, where weighing based on other criteria (money, prestige) would require some more tournament metadata. Now that I think about it, any sort of tournament-based weighting would require a different rating algorithm than the current one - the current one is "simply" asking "which set of ratings maximises the probability of these real life outcomes" which have already happened, it's an "ex post" algorithm. Something like Elo might be more suited for weighing, where ratings are evaluated continuously, and you can apply "multipliers" to given results.
Currently, the matches aren't assigned to a given tournament. The descriptions you see here http://aligulac.com/results/ are just made up by whoever plots in the data from the first played game, and the rest of us just use the same form
I usually just use a similar description as the LR-thread I copy from :D
|
On December 29 2012 04:36 TheBB wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2012 01:05 Salient wrote:
The ranking system is only useful if it is predictive. I'm getting tired of this. The whole idea behind the system was to make it predictive. image Behold. This is a plot of almost 50k historical games. On the horizontal axis you find predicted winrate for the presumed stronger player, using the ratings at the time the game was played. The games were grouped in reasonably small groups, i.e. 50%-53.3% and so on. (Obviously no numbers below 50 since this is the predicted winrate for the stronger player. It also only goes up to about 75 because there are very few games past that.) On the vertical axis is the actual winrate for each group. As can be plainly seen cough, cough, the actual winrate is close to the predicted winrate or, in some cases, higher. Now I'm no statistician, and honestly I don't know how to do a proper prediction test, but it looks fucking damnable good to me.
Does that mean, that if I want the actual winrate I have to add a couple %-points to the result your website delivers? Or do you account for that internally while giving me the predicted winrate?
Another question: Does your choice of the periods affect the ratings? For example if PlayerA wins 1 TvZ in period 1 and loses 1 TvP in period 2. Then his racespecific ranking don't differ from each other at the end of period 2, right?
But what if he plays both games in 1 period? Then the racespecific ranks will differ if I understand it correctly.
This doesn't make much sense to me. For example Demuslim played a 2-3 vs Violet and 3-0 vs Sen in the last period. I don't see why it's fair, that his TvP and TvT get the same boost as his TvZ as I'm pretty sure that his TvZ is his best MU right now.
|
I think the fact that CombatEX made the list shows there is something wrong with the way this is calculated. It honestly single-handedly crushes any credibility this list might have had, and takes away from the other players on the list, or not on the list.
|
Combat-EX making his way through the zergs!
|
On January 05 2013 11:14 envyYaegz wrote:
I think the fact that CombatEX made the list shows there is something wrong with the way this is calculated. It honestly single-handedly crushes any credibility this list might have had, and takes away from the other players on the list, or not on the list.
First everybody bitched that circumstances led to CombatEx representing Canada, then he does well there and you still keep your head in the sand? Honestly his results are probably better than fellow Canuck HuK would've had at that event.
That being said, I am deathly afraid of CombatEx. The name shakes me to the core. I couldn't even type it out, I had to copy and paste it into my post.
The great battle between the heart and the head in this thread is hilarious: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/User_talk:EhonTiming!/CombatEX
|
On January 05 2013 11:14 envyYaegz wrote:
I think the fact that CombatEX made the list shows there is something wrong with the way this is calculated. It honestly single-handedly crushes any credibility this list might have had, and takes away from the other players on the list, or not on the list.
If you take an entry with only 6 games and say that this list doesn't have any credibility you are just being dumb. If you only have 6 datapoints no system in the world can make an accurate description of a players skill...
|
On January 05 2013 11:07 Greenei wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2012 04:36 TheBB wrote:On December 29 2012 01:05 Salient wrote:
The ranking system is only useful if it is predictive. I'm getting tired of this. The whole idea behind the system was to make it predictive. image Behold. This is a plot of almost 50k historical games. On the horizontal axis you find predicted winrate for the presumed stronger player, using the ratings at the time the game was played. The games were grouped in reasonably small groups, i.e. 50%-53.3% and so on. (Obviously no numbers below 50 since this is the predicted winrate for the stronger player. It also only goes up to about 75 because there are very few games past that.) On the vertical axis is the actual winrate for each group. As can be plainly seen cough, cough, the actual winrate is close to the predicted winrate or, in some cases, higher. Now I'm no statistician, and honestly I don't know how to do a proper prediction test, but it looks fucking damnable good to me. Does that mean, that if I want the actual winrate I have to add a couple %-points to the result your website delivers? Or do you account for that internally while giving me the predicted winrate?
That's not accounted for, no. You can add those percentages if you like, I think most people feel (and I would agree) that the percentages are sometimes a bit extreme.
On January 05 2013 11:07 Greenei wrote:Another question: Does your choice of the periods affect the ratings? For example if PlayerA wins 1 TvZ in period 1 and loses 1 TvP in period 2. Then his racespecific ranking don't differ from each other at the end of period 2, right?
But what if he plays both games in 1 period? Then the racespecific ranks will differ if I understand it correctly.
This doesn't make much sense to me. For example Demuslim played a 2-3 vs Violet and 3-0 vs Sen in the last period. I don't see why it's fair, that his TvP and TvT get the same boost as his TvZ as I'm pretty sure that his TvZ is his best MU right now.
Well yeah, that's a weakness. The distribution of games over periods matters, not just their order. This is true for most rating systems. It's a bit more visible here because the periods are short, as well as the race thing. It's just the sort of thing that happens when you use discrete instead of continuous time I guess.
If you're mathematically inclined, I do this to ensure that the likelihood function has a unique maximum (or in other words, it restricts the parameter space so that the Hessian is nondegenerate). I could do that in a different way, too, which would allow race-specific matchups to change even in cases like those you mention.
If I didn't do it, then there's no way to tell if a 10-0 in TvT over a period is due to an increase in (a) general skill, (b) TvT skill or (c) a combination of the two. In the case of (c), some choice has to be made regarding the mixing factor.
|
Am I missing something about specialization?
Site shows Stephano (+281 vT) while Life has a difference of +348 between his vT and overall rating.
e: It would be cool if the site sorted more things like best in each MU (as well as how much higher someone is than 2nd place). i.e.
ZvT: Life 3203 (+661)
|
I find it very interesting how many players have two very similar match-up ratings and then the third is vastly different. I think this could be analysed further :D
|
On December 29 2012 06:54 Grovbolle wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2012 05:39 Salient wrote:
The GSL ratings are superior because they are limited to games between top players. You fail to account for the quality of the games with your statistics 101 class project. More sophisticated models can actually do that (and thus become more powerful), but they become necessarily more subjective. It's a price you need to pay to make the ratings meaningful. It takes a lot of work though. Your system is apparently less subjective and easier to construct, but you get what you pay for. Please enlighten us with you vast knowledge, because obviously you are some sort of mathematical genius who can quantify subjectivity in a meaningful and objective/useful way. Also, please define top players. If you want subjectivity, just read power ranks plz.
With "less subjective" he probably means taking less "non-data", e.g. weights for tournaments, which make matches in big tournaments count more than online cups.
By the way, why is CombatEx appearing on the list. Did he place well in some tournaments I am not aware of?
|
On January 08 2013 00:40 JustPassingBy wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2012 06:54 Grovbolle wrote:On December 29 2012 05:39 Salient wrote:
The GSL ratings are superior because they are limited to games between top players. You fail to account for the quality of the games with your statistics 101 class project. More sophisticated models can actually do that (and thus become more powerful), but they become necessarily more subjective. It's a price you need to pay to make the ratings meaningful. It takes a lot of work though. Your system is apparently less subjective and easier to construct, but you get what you pay for. Please enlighten us with you vast knowledge, because obviously you are some sort of mathematical genius who can quantify subjectivity in a meaningful and objective/useful way. Also, please define top players. If you want subjectivity, just read power ranks plz. With "less subjective" he probably means taking less "non-data", e.g. weights for tournaments, which make matches in big tournaments count more than online cups. By the way, why is CombatEx appearing on the list. Did he place well in some tournaments I am not aware of?
he got 4th in WCG i believe, im not sure how that makes him appear on that list.
|
Bisutopia19229 Posts
Seeing this list reinforces my question why people call  Stephano the undisputed best foreigner. I guess I don't buy into the hype and am more impressed with other foreigners more.
|
On January 08 2013 00:44 KalWarkov wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2013 00:40 JustPassingBy wrote:On December 29 2012 06:54 Grovbolle wrote:On December 29 2012 05:39 Salient wrote:
The GSL ratings are superior because they are limited to games between top players. You fail to account for the quality of the games with your statistics 101 class project. More sophisticated models can actually do that (and thus become more powerful), but they become necessarily more subjective. It's a price you need to pay to make the ratings meaningful. It takes a lot of work though. Your system is apparently less subjective and easier to construct, but you get what you pay for. Please enlighten us with you vast knowledge, because obviously you are some sort of mathematical genius who can quantify subjectivity in a meaningful and objective/useful way. Also, please define top players. If you want subjectivity, just read power ranks plz. With "less subjective" he probably means taking less "non-data", e.g. weights for tournaments, which make matches in big tournaments count more than online cups. By the way, why is CombatEx appearing on the list. Did he place well in some tournaments I am not aware of? he got 4th in WCG i believe, im not sure how that makes him appear on that list.
He took a map off PartinG who is highly ranked, and since there is very few CombatEX games in the database, the model is not sure of his skilllevel placing him relatively high because he took a map off a top-player.
|
On January 08 2013 00:40 JustPassingBy wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2012 06:54 Grovbolle wrote:On December 29 2012 05:39 Salient wrote:
The GSL ratings are superior because they are limited to games between top players. You fail to account for the quality of the games with your statistics 101 class project. More sophisticated models can actually do that (and thus become more powerful), but they become necessarily more subjective. It's a price you need to pay to make the ratings meaningful. It takes a lot of work though. Your system is apparently less subjective and easier to construct, but you get what you pay for. Please enlighten us with you vast knowledge, because obviously you are some sort of mathematical genius who can quantify subjectivity in a meaningful and objective/useful way. Also, please define top players. If you want subjectivity, just read power ranks plz. With "less subjective" he probably means taking less "non-data", e.g. weights for tournaments, which make matches in big tournaments count more than online cups. By the way, why is CombatEx appearing on the list. Did he place well in some tournaments I am not aware of?
Doing that still makes the rankings more subjective and less objective.
|
Funny how most the good vZ's are... zergs. (And Parting's immortal allin. :D)
|
On January 08 2013 00:53 speknek wrote:
Funny how most the good vZ's are... zergs. (And Parting's immortal allin. :D)
I have a pet theory about this. It strikes me that many (most?) of the great players of each race are (or were for a while) considered almost untouchable in their mirror matchups.
Jaedong, Flash, NesTea, Mvp...
I don't know if I'm seeing shadows or not.
|
Bisutopia19229 Posts
On January 08 2013 01:37 TheBB wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2013 00:53 speknek wrote:
Funny how most the good vZ's are... zergs. (And Parting's immortal allin. :D) I have a pet theory about this. It strikes me that many (most?) of the great players of each race are (or were for a while) considered almost untouchable in their mirror matchups. Jaedong, Flash, NesTea, Mvp... I don't know if I'm seeing shadows or not.
I do agree that it seems like the best mirror match players tend to be top dogs of their race in general. Even when a player like  BeSt was the best PvP player, he was one of the strongest all around too.
|
On January 08 2013 00:47 BisuDagger wrote:Seeing this list reinforces my question why people call Stephano the undisputed best foreigner. I guess I don't buy into the hype and am more impressed with other foreigners more.
He has been performing a lot worst lately , that's the only reason he isn't #1, he is #4 on the TLPD Elo as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ozo8z.png?1)
