|
There seems to be a lull over the new-year period, so this time not much has changed. Zerg is still leading (a bit more than before), and Protoss is lagging (also more than before).
Note that some older games were added, so ratings will have changed in previous lists too.
In the top 10, DongRaeGu passes BaBy in the rankings. VortiX makes an appearance after gaining 118 points, and Jaedong sneaks in on 10th place after gaining 151. HerO and EffOrt fall out.
-
 Life 2860
-
 PartinG 2622
- Sniper 2569
-
 Bomber 2504
- HyuN 2491
- DongRaeGu 2472
- BaBy 2402
- VortiX 2391
- viOLet 2389
- Jaedong 2372
In the top 10 foreigner list, Welmu and LiveZerg appear after solid ZOTAC performances. They replace MacSed and Kas.
- VortiX 2391
- Scarlett 2246
- Sen 2240
- Snute 2181
- Welmu 2115
- Stephano 2113
- LucifroN 2087
- LiveZerg 2008
- TLO 2006
- XlorD 1986
New this week is the team ranking, at the moment displayed in percentages, but I will turn them into rating points soon when I figure out how to do it. Here's the allkill rank, which rewards topped teams:
- StarTale
- MVP
- SK Telecom T1
- Team Liquid
- FXOpen e-Sports Korea
- STX SouL
- Incredible Miracle
- KT Rolster
- Evil Geniuses
- Woongjin Stars
And the proleague-style rank, which rewards deep rosters (AZUBU in, Woongjin out):
- StarTale
- MVP
- SK Telecom T1
- STX SouL
- Team Liquid
- Incredible Miracle
- AZUBU
- Evil Geniuses
- FXOpen e-Sports Korea
- KT Rolster
New features from last week:
- You can see all the recorded games for a player by going to the player page and clicking the "Match history" link. Example.
- The records are now only counted once per player.
- You can now sort the list by any of the four reported ratings.
- We have a new Hall of Fame that attempts to assess performance over time. I failed a bit trying to put it into words, so here's an example. If Life is #1 on the list three times consecutively, with a rating gap of 10, 40 and 80 points, his PP for this period is 130. If he drops to number 2 but back to number 1 again (-10 and 20) his PP will be 140 over those five lists. The system will find the range for each player that gives them the maximal PP. Currently Bomber is demolishing this ranking due to his powerful run for four months in the spring and summer of 2011. Life is second, and he's piling up points as we speak. His run is nearly as long, but he hasn't been as far ahead of his peers as Bomber was.
- As mentioned, the teams. I have been adding historical rosters, but they are incomplete still, and due to spotty record-keeping I'm not sure if I can ever provide historical team ratings
 . Still, the current rosters should be mostly correct.
- The prediction interface has changed a bit, in anticipation of supporting prediction for groups and brackets.
In addition to this, the site should now be fully zoomable (try it, it's pretty sweet).
This time I would like some feedback from you guys, on two points. First, the HotS release is coming up. What to do? I was originally planning to do nothing and just let the ratings modify themselves (which happens quite quickly). I don't think the games are that different. The other thing I could do is reset all ratings to 1000 and start from scratch. This would mean that the ratings would become quite unreliable for a fairly long period of time (several months) until they readjust. The third option is that I keep the rating, but I reset the uncertainty. This would be akin to marking the WoL ratings as "less trusted", putting a far heavier weight on new results in HotS.
Poll: What strategy would you favour?Reset uncertainties. (44) 54% Reset ratings and uncertainties. (25) 30% Do nothing. (13) 16% 82 total votes Your vote: What strategy would you favour? (Vote): Reset ratings and uncertainties.
(Vote): Reset uncertainties.
(Vote): Do nothing.
Secondly, fonts. I'm a sucker for serifs, but are you? All the tabular data keep the old sans-serif font, but the more textual things are now serif.
Poll: Font change?Like it. (41) 89% Hate it. (5) 11% 46 total votes Your vote: Font change? (Vote): Like it.
(Vote): Hate it.
To round off this post, I would like to thank my ever hardworking team of helpers. They are: KristofferAG, PhoenixVoid, Grovbolle, Conti (who was a great help with the team rosters), and new guy kiekaboe (who has been adding results like crazy).
Feedback is always appreciated (particularly on the two points above), but if you have any other suggestions or questions, may I kindly request that you read the FAQ first, as your question may have already been answered there.
|
|
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
I really like these  keep it up.
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
Just to clarify, these rankings represent who's dominant in a short period of time correct? Shorter than the ELO ranking of TL at least?
Anyways, you're doing an awesome job! Personally I'm not a serif fan+ Show Spoiler + but I think the site looks great regardless.
|
On January 10 2013 20:13 Targe wrote:
Just to clarify, these rankings represent who's dominant in a short period of time correct? Shorter than the ELO ranking of TL at least?
I think the word you're looking for is volatile, and the answer is that yeah, these ratings react quite quickly to apparent changes in skill.
|
to be taken with a "grain of salt", considering MVP (surely the most dominant T we've seen in wol, don't think you can argue with that) appears ONCE in the terran hall of fame (http://aligulac.com/records/?race=T)
|
dang that's a whole lot of zerg!
|
Whoops, voted for the wrong thing. I'm all for just resetting uncertainties, but I voted for resetting uncertainties and ratings.
Great work, as always! It's fun to tinker with teams and the like and see small parts of the site change because you seem to be constantly working on it. :D
|
|
|
So yeah... Practically a zerg list.
|
holy zerg dominance
Can't wait for HOTS.
|
Thank you theBB, even if there are some weird stuff (mostly with foreigners vs people who only play on korea, hehe you can see it with Vortix right now) most are really really accurate i would say. I had been comparing the results on up&downs with your prediction tool, and it's amazingly accurate for the most part.
Thanks again and keep up the awesome work you are doing.
|
Can we get a list of the best protoss and terran?
Like 10 best protoss and 10 best terran?
Something without zerg? lol
|
On January 10 2013 20:16 Toxi78 wrote:
to be taken with a "grain of salt", considering MVP (surely the most dominant T we've seen in wol, don't think you can argue with that) appears ONCE in the terran hall of fame (http://aligulac.com/records/?race=T)
Mvp is good at winning tournaments. I don't think he was as far ahead of his peers as the paychecks indicated. Also this ranking tends to value very high performance over short periods of time over "quite" high performance over long periods of time. That's why I made the Hall of Fame (where Mvp is third).
|
amazing work
not only with the list and the big changes like teampages, but also with the small changes.
|
+ Show Spoiler +7/10 Overall list is Zergs 8/10 Foreigner list is Zergs Exactly how balance is now
Thanks for hard works, so interested
|
|
|
Sad Zealot. =(
Happy Startale!
|
|
|
Cool to see Tear and First on the protoss list - they don't get nearly as much hype as other players like Yongwha.
|
On January 10 2013 20:44 TheBB wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2013 20:16 Toxi78 wrote:
to be taken with a "grain of salt", considering MVP (surely the most dominant T we've seen in wol, don't think you can argue with that) appears ONCE in the terran hall of fame (http://aligulac.com/records/?race=T) Mvp is good at winning tournaments. I don't think he was as far ahead of his peers as the paychecks indicated. Also this ranking tends to value very high performance over short periods of time over "quite" high performance over long periods of time. That's why I made the Hall of Fame (where Mvp is third).
MVP not being at any foreign tournaments for quite a long time probably also had quite an effect on his ratings. While winning vs top tier competition gives bigger rating jumps, winning is still winning, and Bomber for example racked up a lot of his rating by dominating foreign competitions(and all-killing GSTL matches).
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
On January 10 2013 20:16 TheBB wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2013 20:13 Targe wrote:
Just to clarify, these rankings represent who's dominant in a short period of time correct? Shorter than the ELO ranking of TL at least? I think the word you're looking for is volatile, and the answer is that yeah, these ratings react quite quickly to apparent changes in skill.
Awesome, that's definitely the word I was looking for, thanks for the reply. That means this is helpful for me because I cannot follow what's going on 24/7 and am often quite clueless as to the true skill of a player at a current time + Show Spoiler +I know players who were good for a time e.g. Taeja was incredible for a bit and I didn't realise he wasn't still incredible until a month after he had started losing games, this happened to me with DRG as well -.-
|
Would be nice if you added the: "Show only X country" or "Show without X Country"
Could be used to see only American players, or see the list without Koreans (Which I guess most would like to have :-P)
Also: Always a pleasure to work with you and help you, I really love the project
|
This shows how broken the game is with Zerg players dominating the lists of best Korean and best Foreigners. It's undeniable now.
|
|
|
Online performances really helped in a time where not much is going on tournament-wise. And Welmu really did extremely well in the last couple of weeks, glad he gets some recognition in the list.
Yay for VortiX and it's a bit weird that Baby is still hanging around, I never understood how he got up there in the first place.
|
How is KT so low despite dominating Proleague?
|
Surprised to see a protoss so high on that list
|
On January 11 2013 08:03 StarVe wrote:
Online performances really helped in a time where not much is going on tournament-wise. And Welmu really did extremely well in the last couple of weeks, glad he gets some recognition in the list.
Yay for VortiX and it's a bit weird that Baby is still hanging around, I never understood how he got up there in the first place.
Looks like he got a lot of points from the MvP matches:
http://aligulac.com/players/63/period/69/
Since then he's been slowly going down:
http://aligulac.com/players/63/historical/
There were so many MvP games, that should help get the relative ratings of Koreans vs Foreigners more accurate. After Baby and other Kespa players took rating points from overrated foreigners, he is now distributing them to other Koreans.
|
On January 11 2013 08:06 RainmanMP wrote:
How is KT so low despite dominating Proleague?
Remember that the team rank is not based on results in team leagues, but rather on simulations, which are based on the ratings of the individual players on the team. The question should then be: why are players on KT ranked so low, in spite of dominating in Proleague?
The obvious answer is probably that the Kespa players play fewer games than the ESF players do, so their ratings don't update as quickly. (This also explains why Baby is still ranked so high. He did great in MvP, and then he keeps playing just enough games to stay active, but not enough to really drop down quickly.)
Another explanation could be that the KT players are doing well in Proleague but poorly in other leagues. (Certainly possible, considering the recent Up and Downs for example. I'm not familiar enough with each of them to say.)
Feel free to investigate. You can see the matches that caused each rating adjustment by going to a player page, clicking "rating history" and then clicking the little arrow to the right of the entry you are interested in.
|
On January 11 2013 08:29 TheBB wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 08:06 RainmanMP wrote:
How is KT so low despite dominating Proleague? Remember that the team rank is not based on results in team leagues, but rather on simulations, which are based on the ratings of the individual players on the team. The question should then be: why are players on KT ranked so low, in spite of dominating in Proleague? The obvious answer is probably that the Kespa players play fewer games than the ESF players do, so their ratings don't update as quickly. (This also explains why Baby is still ranked so high. He did great in MvP, and then he keeps playing just enough games to stay active, but not enough to really drop down quickly.) Another explanation could be that the KT players are doing well in Proleague but poorly in other leagues. (Certainly possible, considering the recent Up and Downs for example. I'm not familiar enough with each of them to say.) Feel free to investigate. You can see the matches that caused each rating adjustment by going to a player page, clicking "rating history" and then clicking the little arrow to the right of the entry you are interested in.
Why are rating update speed and number of games related?
|
On January 11 2013 08:29 TheBB wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 08:06 RainmanMP wrote:
How is KT so low despite dominating Proleague? Remember that the team rank is not based on results in team leagues, but rather on simulations, which are based on the ratings of the individual players on the team. The question should then be: why are players on KT ranked so low, in spite of dominating in Proleague? The obvious answer is probably that the Kespa players play fewer games than the ESF players do, so their ratings don't update as quickly. (This also explains why Baby is still ranked so high. He did great in MvP, and then he keeps playing just enough games to stay active, but not enough to really drop down quickly.) Another explanation could be that the KT players are doing well in Proleague but poorly in other leagues. (Certainly possible, considering the recent Up and Downs for example. I'm not familiar enough with each of them to say.) Feel free to investigate. You can see the matches that caused each rating adjustment by going to a player page, clicking "rating history" and then clicking the little arrow to the right of the entry you are interested in.
Well that makes sense with Jaedong being top 10 despite Flash putting in the better proleague performance because of the up and downs.
I don't know of anyone on KT other than Flash who has done anything in individual leagues since the MvP tournament, remind me if there are 
|
the term "patchzerg" is real? i thought it was just a whining term
|
On January 11 2013 08:36 jinorazi wrote:
the term "patchzerg" is real? i thought it was just a whining term
It's a term for people that don't know when Brood War pros switched to SC2 and assorted international players weren't known before WCS because their countries don't get very much spotlight. It's not a whining term, just a term used by those that have no idea what they're talking about.
|
On January 11 2013 08:34 Hier wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 08:29 TheBB wrote:On January 11 2013 08:06 RainmanMP wrote:
How is KT so low despite dominating Proleague? Remember that the team rank is not based on results in team leagues, but rather on simulations, which are based on the ratings of the individual players on the team. The question should then be: why are players on KT ranked so low, in spite of dominating in Proleague? The obvious answer is probably that the Kespa players play fewer games than the ESF players do, so their ratings don't update as quickly. (This also explains why Baby is still ranked so high. He did great in MvP, and then he keeps playing just enough games to stay active, but not enough to really drop down quickly.) Another explanation could be that the KT players are doing well in Proleague but poorly in other leagues. (Certainly possible, considering the recent Up and Downs for example. I'm not familiar enough with each of them to say.) Feel free to investigate. You can see the matches that caused each rating adjustment by going to a player page, clicking "rating history" and then clicking the little arrow to the right of the entry you are interested in. Why are rating update speed and number of games related?
Please, read the FAQ. I wrote it for exactly these kinds of questions. Relevant section:
Then, the new rating is adjusted somewhat in the direction of the maximal likelihood rating found above. How much it's adjusted depends on how certain the original rating was, and how certain the maximal likelihood rating is (how consistent the results were). The adjustment will be biased towards whichever of these two is most certain.
Basically, the more games a player plays over a shorter time period, the more accurately we can pinpoint his or her current skill. More weight will then be given to the recent results, and less weight to the rating from the previous list. If a player plays fewer games, they gauge the current skill of a player very inaccurately, and so the system will "prefer" the relative certainty of the already established rating.
The uncertainty of a player's rating will grow over time if he or she doesn't play enough games. At the moment Baby's rating has an estimated standard deviation of about 93 points. After his MvP run, it was about 72. If it grows much larger, his rating will adjust quicker.
|
this should be all the ammo that the zerg-too-strong lot need
|
Makes me proud to be a startales fan , even when they had the even crappier logos -_-.
|
On January 11 2013 08:41 Elite_ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 08:36 jinorazi wrote:
the term "patchzerg" is real? i thought it was just a whining term It's a term for people that don't know when Brood War pros switched to SC2 and assorted international players weren't known before WCS because their countries don't get very much spotlight. It's not a whining term, just a term used by those that have no idea what they're talking about.
It's a term for Zergs who have been playing for longer than since 1.5 came out and only started to get good around then. Their game plan only revolves around getting to BL Infestor as fast as possible and hoping you don't die before then. Patchzergs are players who are able to win, or get really close losses despite glaring holes in their game play and being outplayed all game long because of how cost efficient you can be with infestors right now.
It also applies to players who had good mechanics but no results who just dominate now that Zerg have their optimal composition, most Korean zergs would fall into this category while foreigners are the more of the former.
Vers article sums it up well, and you're silly if you think he has no idea what he's talking about
|
So, on a different topic to balance whine...
Damn, startale still being top of both team formats even without parting.
|
yeah keep posting rating lists >_>
|
On January 11 2013 08:41 TheBB wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 08:34 Hier wrote:On January 11 2013 08:29 TheBB wrote:On January 11 2013 08:06 RainmanMP wrote:
How is KT so low despite dominating Proleague? Remember that the team rank is not based on results in team leagues, but rather on simulations, which are based on the ratings of the individual players on the team. The question should then be: why are players on KT ranked so low, in spite of dominating in Proleague? The obvious answer is probably that the Kespa players play fewer games than the ESF players do, so their ratings don't update as quickly. (This also explains why Baby is still ranked so high. He did great in MvP, and then he keeps playing just enough games to stay active, but not enough to really drop down quickly.) Another explanation could be that the KT players are doing well in Proleague but poorly in other leagues. (Certainly possible, considering the recent Up and Downs for example. I'm not familiar enough with each of them to say.) Feel free to investigate. You can see the matches that caused each rating adjustment by going to a player page, clicking "rating history" and then clicking the little arrow to the right of the entry you are interested in. Why are rating update speed and number of games related? Please, read the FAQ. I wrote it for exactly these kinds of questions. Relevant section: Show nested quote +Then, the new rating is adjusted somewhat in the direction of the maximal likelihood rating found above. How much it's adjusted depends on how certain the original rating was, and how certain the maximal likelihood rating is (how consistent the results were). The adjustment will be biased towards whichever of these two is most certain. Basically, the more games a player plays over a shorter time period, the more accurately we can pinpoint his or her current skill. More weight will then be given to the recent results, and less weight to the rating from the previous list. If a player plays fewer games, they gauge the current skill of a player very inaccurately, and so the system will "prefer" the relative certainty of the already established rating. The uncertainty of a player's rating will grow over time if he or she doesn't play enough games. At the moment Baby's rating has an estimated standard deviation of about 93 points. After his MvP run, it was about 72. If it grows much larger, his rating will adjust quicker.
So the system does not reflect current player ratings, rather past ratings?
|
Aligulac makes me sad when I look at the UP race list. Actually, it makes me even more depressed looking at what's almost not in the OP race list.
|
According to this Flash has the best TvT in the world... I do like the effort; I've been following these threads for a while now.
|
On January 11 2013 09:08 Hier wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 08:41 TheBB wrote:On January 11 2013 08:34 Hier wrote:On January 11 2013 08:29 TheBB wrote:On January 11 2013 08:06 RainmanMP wrote:
How is KT so low despite dominating Proleague? Remember that the team rank is not based on results in team leagues, but rather on simulations, which are based on the ratings of the individual players on the team. The question should then be: why are players on KT ranked so low, in spite of dominating in Proleague? The obvious answer is probably that the Kespa players play fewer games than the ESF players do, so their ratings don't update as quickly. (This also explains why Baby is still ranked so high. He did great in MvP, and then he keeps playing just enough games to stay active, but not enough to really drop down quickly.) Another explanation could be that the KT players are doing well in Proleague but poorly in other leagues. (Certainly possible, considering the recent Up and Downs for example. I'm not familiar enough with each of them to say.) Feel free to investigate. You can see the matches that caused each rating adjustment by going to a player page, clicking "rating history" and then clicking the little arrow to the right of the entry you are interested in. Why are rating update speed and number of games related? Please, read the FAQ. I wrote it for exactly these kinds of questions. Relevant section: Then, the new rating is adjusted somewhat in the direction of the maximal likelihood rating found above. How much it's adjusted depends on how certain the original rating was, and how certain the maximal likelihood rating is (how consistent the results were). The adjustment will be biased towards whichever of these two is most certain. Basically, the more games a player plays over a shorter time period, the more accurately we can pinpoint his or her current skill. More weight will then be given to the recent results, and less weight to the rating from the previous list. If a player plays fewer games, they gauge the current skill of a player very inaccurately, and so the system will "prefer" the relative certainty of the already established rating. The uncertainty of a player's rating will grow over time if he or she doesn't play enough games. At the moment Baby's rating has an estimated standard deviation of about 93 points. After his MvP run, it was about 72. If it grows much larger, his rating will adjust quicker. So the system does not reflect current player ratings, rather past ratings?
What am I supposed to say? We use games to estimate a player's skill, and if there aren't enough games, what then? I can't just pull numbers out of thin air.
If a player goes on a tear and establishes a very high and very accurate rating, then disappears and returns four months later to play four games with middling results, what would you say about his current skill? It seems reasonable to me to say that we're not very sure, but he's probably still a pretty good player, just maybe not as good as we originally thought.
The system tries as well as it can to estimate current skill. For some players, this is easy (they play a lot), and for others this is hard (they play little). This difficulty is reflected in the standard deviation, which is high for some and low for others. This standard deviation also directly influences how quickly ratings adjust.
|
What's Brown been up to recently?
|
|
|
Also Bomber's TvP decreased despite him winning 3-0 against protoss in GSL, infact he's gone 3 map losses in 21 against protoss...
|
On January 11 2013 09:15 TheBB wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 09:08 Hier wrote:On January 11 2013 08:41 TheBB wrote:On January 11 2013 08:34 Hier wrote:On January 11 2013 08:29 TheBB wrote:On January 11 2013 08:06 RainmanMP wrote:
How is KT so low despite dominating Proleague? Remember that the team rank is not based on results in team leagues, but rather on simulations, which are based on the ratings of the individual players on the team. The question should then be: why are players on KT ranked so low, in spite of dominating in Proleague? The obvious answer is probably that the Kespa players play fewer games than the ESF players do, so their ratings don't update as quickly. (This also explains why Baby is still ranked so high. He did great in MvP, and then he keeps playing just enough games to stay active, but not enough to really drop down quickly.) Another explanation could be that the KT players are doing well in Proleague but poorly in other leagues. (Certainly possible, considering the recent Up and Downs for example. I'm not familiar enough with each of them to say.) Feel free to investigate. You can see the matches that caused each rating adjustment by going to a player page, clicking "rating history" and then clicking the little arrow to the right of the entry you are interested in. Why are rating update speed and number of games related? Please, read the FAQ. I wrote it for exactly these kinds of questions. Relevant section: Then, the new rating is adjusted somewhat in the direction of the maximal likelihood rating found above. How much it's adjusted depends on how certain the original rating was, and how certain the maximal likelihood rating is (how consistent the results were). The adjustment will be biased towards whichever of these two is most certain. Basically, the more games a player plays over a shorter time period, the more accurately we can pinpoint his or her current skill. More weight will then be given to the recent results, and less weight to the rating from the previous list. If a player plays fewer games, they gauge the current skill of a player very inaccurately, and so the system will "prefer" the relative certainty of the already established rating. The uncertainty of a player's rating will grow over time if he or she doesn't play enough games. At the moment Baby's rating has an estimated standard deviation of about 93 points. After his MvP run, it was about 72. If it grows much larger, his rating will adjust quicker. So the system does not reflect current player ratings, rather past ratings? What am I supposed to say? We use games to estimate a player's skill, and if there aren't enough games, what then? I can't just pull numbers out of thin air. If a player goes on a tear and establishes a very high and very accurate rating, then disappears and returns four months later to play four games with middling results, what would you say about his current skill? It seems reasonable to me to say that we're not very sure, but he's probably still a pretty good player, just maybe not as good as we originally thought. The system tries as well as it can to estimate current skill. For some players, this is easy (they play a lot), and for others this is hard (they play little). This difficulty is reflected in the standard deviation, which is high for some and low for others. This standard deviation also directly influences how quickly ratings adjust.
But why does it put less weight on recent games, even if they are less frequent than before? How does the system handle varying uniform game frequencies with respect to players' ratings?
|
8 of top 10 foreigners are zerg, what a surprise
|
On January 11 2013 09:23 Hier wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 09:15 TheBB wrote:On January 11 2013 09:08 Hier wrote:On January 11 2013 08:41 TheBB wrote:On January 11 2013 08:34 Hier wrote:On January 11 2013 08:29 TheBB wrote:On January 11 2013 08:06 RainmanMP wrote:
How is KT so low despite dominating Proleague? Remember that the team rank is not based on results in team leagues, but rather on simulations, which are based on the ratings of the individual players on the team. The question should then be: why are players on KT ranked so low, in spite of dominating in Proleague? The obvious answer is probably that the Kespa players play fewer games than the ESF players do, so their ratings don't update as quickly. (This also explains why Baby is still ranked so high. He did great in MvP, and then he keeps playing just enough games to stay active, but not enough to really drop down quickly.) Another explanation could be that the KT players are doing well in Proleague but poorly in other leagues. (Certainly possible, considering the recent Up and Downs for example. I'm not familiar enough with each of them to say.) Feel free to investigate. You can see the matches that caused each rating adjustment by going to a player page, clicking "rating history" and then clicking the little arrow to the right of the entry you are interested in. Why are rating update speed and number of games related? Please, read the FAQ. I wrote it for exactly these kinds of questions. Relevant section: Then, the new rating is adjusted somewhat in the direction of the maximal likelihood rating found above. How much it's adjusted depends on how certain the original rating was, and how certain the maximal likelihood rating is (how consistent the results were). The adjustment will be biased towards whichever of these two is most certain. Basically, the more games a player plays over a shorter time period, the more accurately we can pinpoint his or her current skill. More weight will then be given to the recent results, and less weight to the rating from the previous list. If a player plays fewer games, they gauge the current skill of a player very inaccurately, and so the system will "prefer" the relative certainty of the already established rating. The uncertainty of a player's rating will grow over time if he or she doesn't play enough games. At the moment Baby's rating has an estimated standard deviation of about 93 points. After his MvP run, it was about 72. If it grows much larger, his rating will adjust quicker. So the system does not reflect current player ratings, rather past ratings? What am I supposed to say? We use games to estimate a player's skill, and if there aren't enough games, what then? I can't just pull numbers out of thin air. If a player goes on a tear and establishes a very high and very accurate rating, then disappears and returns four months later to play four games with middling results, what would you say about his current skill? It seems reasonable to me to say that we're not very sure, but he's probably still a pretty good player, just maybe not as good as we originally thought. The system tries as well as it can to estimate current skill. For some players, this is easy (they play a lot), and for others this is hard (they play little). This difficulty is reflected in the standard deviation, which is high for some and low for others. This standard deviation also directly influences how quickly ratings adjust. But why does it put less weight on recent games, even if they are less frequent than before? How does the system handle varying uniform game frequencies with respect to players' ratings?
It doesn't, more recent games are more heavily weighted. To use a hypothetical example, if a player plays 100 games in a week and then one per fortnight (to stay in theBB's rankings) for 3 months, then you've got 6 games in the past 3 months, and 100 in the one previous. And (not knowing how fast they decay for theBB's algorithm), say the old games are worth half as much as a recent one - that's still a weighting of 50 against 6, and in reality the 6 will have decayed slightly too.
EDIT: You could make a game's weighting decay faster, but then the rankings will become even more volatile.
|
On January 11 2013 09:23 Hier wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2013 09:15 TheBB wrote:On January 11 2013 09:08 Hier wrote:On January 11 2013 08:41 TheBB wrote:On January 11 2013 08:34 Hier wrote:On January 11 2013 08:29 TheBB wrote:On January 11 2013 08:06 RainmanMP wrote:
How is KT so low despite dominating Proleague? Remember that the team rank is not based on results in team leagues, but rather on simulations, which are based on the ratings of the individual players on the team. The question should then be: why are players on KT ranked so low, in spite of dominating in Proleague? The obvious answer is probably that the Kespa players play fewer games than the ESF players do, so their ratings don't update as quickly. (This also explains why Baby is still ranked so high. He did great in MvP, and then he keeps playing just enough games to stay active, but not enough to really drop down quickly.) Another explanation could be that the KT players are doing well in Proleague but poorly in other leagues. (Certainly possible, considering the recent Up and Downs for example. I'm not familiar enough with each of them to say.) Feel free to investigate. You can see the matches that caused each rating adjustment by going to a player page, clicking "rating history" and then clicking the little arrow to the right of the entry you are interested in. Why are rating update speed and number of games related? Please, read the FAQ. I wrote it for exactly these kinds of questions. Relevant section: Then, the new rating is adjusted somewhat in the direction of the maximal likelihood rating found above. How much it's adjusted depends on how certain the original rating was, and how certain the maximal likelihood rating is (how consistent the results were). The adjustment will be biased towards whichever of these two is most certain. Basically, the more games a player plays over a shorter time period, the more accurately we can pinpoint his or her current skill. More weight will then be given to the recent results, and less weight to the rating from the previous list. If a player plays fewer games, they gauge the current skill of a player very inaccurately, and so the system will "prefer" the relative certainty of the already established rating. The uncertainty of a player's rating will grow over time if he or she doesn't play enough games. At the moment Baby's rating has an estimated standard deviation of about 93 points. After his MvP run, it was about 72. If it grows much larger, his rating will adjust quicker. So the system does not reflect current player ratings, rather past ratings? What am I supposed to say? We use games to estimate a player's skill, and if there aren't enough games, what then? I can't just pull numbers out of thin air. If a player goes on a tear and establishes a very high and very accurate rating, then disappears and returns four months later to play four games with middling results, what would you say about his current skill? It seems reasonable to me to say that we're not very sure, but he's probably still a pretty good player, just maybe not as good as we originally thought. The system tries as well as it can to estimate current skill. For some players, this is easy (they play a lot), and for others this is hard (they play little). This difficulty is reflected in the standard deviation, which is high for some and low for others. This standard deviation also directly influences how quickly ratings adjust. But why does it put less weight on recent games, even if they are less frequent than before? How does the system handle varying uniform game frequencies with respect to players' ratings?
It doesn't put less weight on recent games. They are weighted equal to all others (actually a bit more, as dainbramage said,) there just happens to be fewer of them.
If I have five gold dubloons in my left hand and fifty in the other, the five in the left hand will weigh less on account of there being fewer dubloons, not because those dubloons individually weigh less than those in the right hand.
|
Yay, thanks for the hard work =)
|
How can they weigh more when their weight is determined by a change in certainty level of a player's rating? That's why I was asking how players' rating is changed upon a sudden win rate change given varying certainties based on varying uniform game frequencies?
Also, I didn't really see anything on decay.
|
|
|
Interesting concept!
I don't agree with your judgements, but it's a fun read^^ Keep it up plz!
|
28084 Posts
I agree with most of the Korean ones. The foreigner ones are surprising though.
|
I laughed so hard when I saw the OP and UP race list. Sad zealot fan club indeed.
|
truly an era of patch zergs
User was warned for this post
|
On January 11 2013 08:36 jinorazi wrote:
the term "patchzerg" is real? i thought it was just a whining term
Got another explanation for why patch 1.5 mysteriously coincided with the latter half of 2012 being a giant ZvZ fest?
It's real. Only those in deep denial will say otherwise.
|
The Hall of Fame list is so bad... Bomber being number 1 by so much doesn't make any sense to me at all. He's never even won a GSL. The foreigners and Puma are strange as well.
|
I see red, red, red. So many zergs.
|
|
|
Good morning! Time to answer some questions.
On January 11 2013 09:52 Hier wrote:
How can they weigh more when their weight is determined by a change in certainty level of a player's rating? That's why I was asking how players' rating is changed upon a sudden win rate change given varying certainties based on varying uniform game frequencies?
Also, I didn't really see anything on decay.
At this point, all I can really do is refer you to the paper and hope you understand it. Games are not explicitly weighted anywhere. There is an iterative maximisation procedure which causes an implicit weighing. Still, it's a weighing that we can discuss in qualitative terms.
On January 11 2013 16:15 Shinta) wrote:
I don't agree with your judgements
They're not my judgements. You're not reading my personal opinion. I don't tell this thing what to do.
On January 11 2013 16:52 JJH777 wrote:
The Hall of Fame list is so bad... Bomber being number 1 by so much doesn't make any sense to me at all. He's never even won a GSL. The foreigners and Puma are strange as well.
The hall of fame list is a ranking of players who were ever ahead of their peers, and by how much and how long. Remember that it doesn't take overall rating into account. The top rating today is almost 1000 points higher than it was when Morrow was number 1, and most likely many, many of the players on the list today are better now than he was then, but that doesn't matter (to this list, anyway) because Morrow was ahead of his peers and those other players aren't ahead of theirs. If you want an absolute ranking you probably want this, although what it's trying to do is essentially an impossible problem. (Rating systems can only compare players of the same time period, not historically. That's why I called the latter list only "highest ratings achieved", not "best players ever".)
I also want to say I think many of you are confusing "winning tournaments" with "playing well". Yes they are related, strongly so in fact, but not the same thing. Two lost games at the wrong time can cause you to lose a whole GSL (or indeed, any other tournament—nothing special about the GSL here). It's possible to win a GSL by going only 20–15 and it's possible to lose it by going 17–4. The latter player would soar in the rankings, the first not so much. The list of players who are or were definitely good enough to win a GSL, but who haven't, is quite long indeed.
Also remember that the GSL makes up only a fraction of the data.
|
Bomber, BaBy & PartinG: "Day 153 after patch, Zergs are still yet to notice us"
|
On January 10 2013 19:59 TheBB wrote:
This time I would like some feedback from you guys, on two points. First, the HotS release is coming up. What to do? I was originally planning to do nothing and just let the ratings modify themselves (which happens quite quickly). I don't think the games are that different. The other thing I could do is reset all ratings to 1000 and start from scratch. This would mean that the ratings would become quite unreliable for a fairly long period of time (several months) until they readjust. The third option is that I keep the rating, but I reset the uncertainty. This would be akin to marking the WoL ratings as "less trusted", putting a far heavier weight on new results in HotS.
Do nothing.
To reset the uncertainties all to 500 or whatever the initial value is, is to claim that you're suddenly just as sure of the skill of a player who played 1000 games as a player who has played 10 games. The goal is to get the best possible estimate of skill and uncertainty. And there is no conceivable reason why choosing an uncertainty of 500 for everyone would suddenly be a more accurate estimate than whatever it was before HotS, say 30.
It's basically fudging numbers for no reason. Like how science teachers will take marks off if you write in a test that 4.4/2.9 = 1.5172413. The "correct" answer is 1.5 because they claim that the remaining digits is measurement error, despite the fact that there is absolutely no reason why fudging the 0.0172413 part to 0.0000000 would make the answer any more accurate.
If you do anything at all, it should be no more intrusive than increasing everyone's uncertainty by, say, 10%. Doing more would be needlessly fudging numbers by replacing a good estimate with numbers pulled out of something.
|
^ That's a good point, it doesn't have to be more than a slight increase.
|
No matter what you do, I will not be able to figure out if it was smart or not, because I am not that smart :D
|
Another thing to consider is that the games played will not suddenly all be HotS games from the day of HotS's release. In fact, even now there are already some HotS tournaments in the database, and I guess that a month after HotS there will still be WoL tournaments being played as well. So resetting the uncertainty value at a certain point in time could be seen as quite an arbitrary action.
|
I am curious as to why some tournaments matches are included but some are ignored. I noticed that Stephano's win in MSI Pro Cup 13 has been ignored. Also you include some qualifiers like the IEM Katowice qualifiers but ignore others such as the MLG Spring Arena qualifiers or the NASL 3 qualifiers. Why is that? What criteria did you use to inclue MSI Pro Cup #4 but not MSI Pro Cup #13? Just an oversight?
|
On January 12 2013 01:03 revel8 wrote:
I am curious as to why some tournaments matches are included but some are ignored. I noticed that Stephano's win in MSI Pro Cup 13 has been ignored. Also you include some qualifiers like the IEM Katowice qualifiers but ignore others such as the MLG Spring Arena qualifiers or the NASL 3 qualifiers. Why is that? What criteria did you use to inclue MSI Pro Cup #4 but not MSI Pro Cup #13? Just an oversight?
Mainly time and knowledge of the results. Links would help, the more games the better.
|
On January 12 2013 01:03 revel8 wrote:
I am curious as to why some tournaments matches are included but some are ignored. I noticed that Stephano's win in MSI Pro Cup 13 has been ignored. Also you include some qualifiers like the IEM Katowice qualifiers but ignore others such as the MLG Spring Arena qualifiers or the NASL 3 qualifiers. Why is that? What criteria did you use to inclue MSI Pro Cup #4 but not MSI Pro Cup #13? Just an oversight?
If there's anything missing, it's best to provide links to the brackets (From Liquipedia, for instance). The exact dates when the games were played are also needed.
|
|
|
On January 12 2013 01:25 Conti wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 01:03 revel8 wrote:
I am curious as to why some tournaments matches are included but some are ignored. I noticed that Stephano's win in MSI Pro Cup 13 has been ignored. Also you include some qualifiers like the IEM Katowice qualifiers but ignore others such as the MLG Spring Arena qualifiers or the NASL 3 qualifiers. Why is that? What criteria did you use to inclue MSI Pro Cup #4 but not MSI Pro Cup #13? Just an oversight? If there's anything missing, it's best to provide links to the brackets (From Liquipedia, for instance). The exact dates when the games were played are also needed.
OK These are just the results I've noticed being missed for one player, Stephano. They include wins over Socke, Titan, Polt, Hyun, Genius, Supernova, Taeja, Hero, Sniper, Vampire and Finale. For completeness sake they should be included unless there is some criteria I am unaware of that excludes them from the reckoning.
----------------------------------------------
NASL 3 qualifiers
played 02-09-2012 to 03-03-2012
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/North_American_Star_League_Season_3/Season_3_Qualifier
------------------------------------------------
GD Studio Arena 1
played 04-29-2012
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/The_GD_Studio_-_The_Arena/1
----------------------------------------------
MLG Spring Arena Euro qualifiers
played 05-12-2012 to 05-13-2012
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2012_MLG_Pro_Circuit/Spring/Qualifier/Invite/Europe
----------------------------------------------
MSI Pro Cup #13
played 08-28-2012 to 08-30-2012
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/MSI_Pro_Cup_13
-------------------------------------------------
Also I am not sure if you include team leagues but Stephano has beaten the following players in IPTL since joining EG: Taeja, Hero, Vampire, Finale and Sniper and lost to Monster and Seed.
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/IGN_Pro_Team_League_Season_1/Premier_Division
|
So strange to see a list like that without Leenock on it. But then I suppose he hasn't played much lately!
|
On January 12 2013 01:03 revel8 wrote:
I am curious as to why some tournaments matches are included but some are ignored. I noticed that Stephano's win in MSI Pro Cup 13 has been ignored. Also you include some qualifiers like the IEM Katowice qualifiers but ignore others such as the MLG Spring Arena qualifiers or the NASL 3 qualifiers. Why is that? What criteria did you use to inclue MSI Pro Cup #4 but not MSI Pro Cup #13? Just an oversight?
It's actually a pretty monumental task, populating a database with "all" pro SC2 games ever played. We're only a handful of people doing this on a voluntary basis. If you notice something missing, as Grovbolle and Conti said, and just post a link to the results here in this thread. If you want I can get you a submitter account so you can push stuff yourself, too. I think it's pretty quick and painless.
Pretty sure that we have the most complete database available anywhere at the time being, but as you have pointed out yourself, it's hardly perfect yet.
Edit: Thanks a lot!!
|
This is a good example of a problem I've come across here and there, and why some results aren't in the database yet: We need the exact dates for the games. When a game was played matters for the ranking, so a vague date for a few dozen games isn't really useful, unfortunately.
For this one, I found the official thread, which luckily has exact dates included. But there's other tournaments and teamleagues that do not, especially older ones.
Thanks for digging these up, by the way!
|
zergs.... zergs everywhere. i hope that'll change in the next ranking
|
On January 12 2013 02:07 TheBB wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 01:03 revel8 wrote:
I am curious as to why some tournaments matches are included but some are ignored. I noticed that Stephano's win in MSI Pro Cup 13 has been ignored. Also you include some qualifiers like the IEM Katowice qualifiers but ignore others such as the MLG Spring Arena qualifiers or the NASL 3 qualifiers. Why is that? What criteria did you use to inclue MSI Pro Cup #4 but not MSI Pro Cup #13? Just an oversight? It's actually a pretty monumental task, populating a database with "all" pro SC2 games ever played. We're only a handful of people doing this on a voluntary basis. If you notice something missing, as Grovbolle and Conti said, and just post a link to the results here in this thread. If you want I can get you a submitter account so you can push stuff yourself, too. I think it's pretty quick and painless. Pretty sure that we have the most complete database available anywhere at the time being, but as you have pointed out yourself, it's hardly perfect yet. Edit: Thanks a lot!!
I don't want to be critical of your efforts, because it is alot of work and having looked through Stephano's match records it does seem pretty comprehensive (bar those 2012 results I noted above). I don't want to give the impression that I am whining or attempting to discredit your work. The opposite is true, I am impressed and pleased that such a sterling effort has been undertaken. I was just curious about some results that I had noticed were absent. It is perfectly understandable that some results were simply overlooked. 2012 had a ton of tournaments pretty much constantly and the games did not really ever stop.
It is my limited understanding of your ranking system that means players get points based on the current rank of players they beat, so missing games can potentially significantly change the accuracy for numerous players. So adding in those results I have spotted were missing should lead to more complete and accurate rankings. Thanks for your efforts for the scene. I do appreciate it.
|
On January 12 2013 02:26 revel8 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 02:07 TheBB wrote:On January 12 2013 01:03 revel8 wrote:
I am curious as to why some tournaments matches are included but some are ignored. I noticed that Stephano's win in MSI Pro Cup 13 has been ignored. Also you include some qualifiers like the IEM Katowice qualifiers but ignore others such as the MLG Spring Arena qualifiers or the NASL 3 qualifiers. Why is that? What criteria did you use to inclue MSI Pro Cup #4 but not MSI Pro Cup #13? Just an oversight? It's actually a pretty monumental task, populating a database with "all" pro SC2 games ever played. We're only a handful of people doing this on a voluntary basis. If you notice something missing, as Grovbolle and Conti said, and just post a link to the results here in this thread. If you want I can get you a submitter account so you can push stuff yourself, too. I think it's pretty quick and painless. Pretty sure that we have the most complete database available anywhere at the time being, but as you have pointed out yourself, it's hardly perfect yet. Edit: Thanks a lot!! I don't want to be critical of your efforts, because it is alot of work and having looked through Stephano's match records it does seem pretty comprehensive (bar those 2012 results I noted above). I don't want to give the impression that I am whining or attempting to discredit your work. The opposite is true, I am impressed and pleased that such a sterling effort has been undertaken. I was just curious about some results that I had noticed were absent. It is perfectly understandable that some results were simply overlooked. 2012 had a ton of tournaments pretty much constantly and the games did not really ever stop. It is my limited understanding of your ranking system that means players get points based on the current rank of players they beat, so missing games can potentially significantly change the accuracy for numerous players. So adding in those results I have spotted were missing should lead to more complete and accurate rankings. Thanks for your efforts for the scene. I do appreciate it.
I'll take a look at the IPTL you linked when I get the time for it
The older results people want us to add the harder it gets to check if the results are already added under either "unknown event" or something else.
|
why is the top 10 foreigner so zerg heavy? you do know that good foreign terrans exist right? look at lucifron, major and thorzain. all examples of the many many good foreign terrans.
|
Nice work! Keep up the good work. Likin these and nice to see top 10 toss and terran seperated out too
|
Bomber #1 Terran! That's how you know TheBB's stats are LEGIT
|
On January 12 2013 03:05 2muchSWAG wrote:
why is the top 10 foreigner so zerg heavy? you do know that good foreign terrans exist right? look at lucifron, major and thorzain. all examples of the many many good foreign terrans.
Because this is based off statistics and not personal opinion...
|
On January 12 2013 03:14 Grovbolle wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 03:05 2muchSWAG wrote:
why is the top 10 foreigner so zerg heavy? you do know that good foreign terrans exist right? look at lucifron, major and thorzain. all examples of the many many good foreign terrans. Because this is based off statistics and not personal opinion...
so what do the stats say about the zerg race compared to p and t?
User was warned for this post
|
On January 12 2013 03:17 2muchSWAG wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 03:14 Grovbolle wrote:On January 12 2013 03:05 2muchSWAG wrote:
why is the top 10 foreigner so zerg heavy? you do know that good foreign terrans exist right? look at lucifron, major and thorzain. all examples of the many many good foreign terrans. Because this is based off statistics and not personal opinion... so what do the stats say about the zerg race compared to p and t?
Why don't you take a look yourself
http://aligulac.com/periods/
http://aligulac.com/periods/75/
|
On January 12 2013 02:26 revel8 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 02:07 TheBB wrote:On January 12 2013 01:03 revel8 wrote:
I am curious as to why some tournaments matches are included but some are ignored. I noticed that Stephano's win in MSI Pro Cup 13 has been ignored. Also you include some qualifiers like the IEM Katowice qualifiers but ignore others such as the MLG Spring Arena qualifiers or the NASL 3 qualifiers. Why is that? What criteria did you use to inclue MSI Pro Cup #4 but not MSI Pro Cup #13? Just an oversight? It's actually a pretty monumental task, populating a database with "all" pro SC2 games ever played. We're only a handful of people doing this on a voluntary basis. If you notice something missing, as Grovbolle and Conti said, and just post a link to the results here in this thread. If you want I can get you a submitter account so you can push stuff yourself, too. I think it's pretty quick and painless. Pretty sure that we have the most complete database available anywhere at the time being, but as you have pointed out yourself, it's hardly perfect yet. Edit: Thanks a lot!! I don't want to be critical of your efforts, because it is alot of work and having looked through Stephano's match records it does seem pretty comprehensive (bar those 2012 results I noted above). I don't want to give the impression that I am whining or attempting to discredit your work. The opposite is true, I am impressed and pleased that such a sterling effort has been undertaken. I was just curious about some results that I had noticed were absent. It is perfectly understandable that some results were simply overlooked. 2012 had a ton of tournaments pretty much constantly and the games did not really ever stop. It is my limited understanding of your ranking system that means players get points based on the current rank of players they beat, so missing games can potentially significantly change the accuracy for numerous players. So adding in those results I have spotted were missing should lead to more complete and accurate rankings. Thanks for your efforts for the scene. I do appreciate it.
Finished adding the IPTL Season 1 Divisions. Both the Premier and the contender division. Should be updated with the next list I think
|
On January 12 2013 04:25 Grovbolle wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 02:26 revel8 wrote:On January 12 2013 02:07 TheBB wrote:On January 12 2013 01:03 revel8 wrote:
I am curious as to why some tournaments matches are included but some are ignored. I noticed that Stephano's win in MSI Pro Cup 13 has been ignored. Also you include some qualifiers like the IEM Katowice qualifiers but ignore others such as the MLG Spring Arena qualifiers or the NASL 3 qualifiers. Why is that? What criteria did you use to inclue MSI Pro Cup #4 but not MSI Pro Cup #13? Just an oversight? It's actually a pretty monumental task, populating a database with "all" pro SC2 games ever played. We're only a handful of people doing this on a voluntary basis. If you notice something missing, as Grovbolle and Conti said, and just post a link to the results here in this thread. If you want I can get you a submitter account so you can push stuff yourself, too. I think it's pretty quick and painless. Pretty sure that we have the most complete database available anywhere at the time being, but as you have pointed out yourself, it's hardly perfect yet. Edit: Thanks a lot!! I don't want to be critical of your efforts, because it is alot of work and having looked through Stephano's match records it does seem pretty comprehensive (bar those 2012 results I noted above). I don't want to give the impression that I am whining or attempting to discredit your work. The opposite is true, I am impressed and pleased that such a sterling effort has been undertaken. I was just curious about some results that I had noticed were absent. It is perfectly understandable that some results were simply overlooked. 2012 had a ton of tournaments pretty much constantly and the games did not really ever stop. It is my limited understanding of your ranking system that means players get points based on the current rank of players they beat, so missing games can potentially significantly change the accuracy for numerous players. So adding in those results I have spotted were missing should lead to more complete and accurate rankings. Thanks for your efforts for the scene. I do appreciate it. Finished adding the IPTL Season 1 Divisions. Both the Premier and the contender division. Should be updated with the next list I think
Thanks for the swift update! Appreciate it!
|
On January 12 2013 04:36 revel8 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 04:25 Grovbolle wrote:On January 12 2013 02:26 revel8 wrote:On January 12 2013 02:07 TheBB wrote:On January 12 2013 01:03 revel8 wrote:
I am curious as to why some tournaments matches are included but some are ignored. I noticed that Stephano's win in MSI Pro Cup 13 has been ignored. Also you include some qualifiers like the IEM Katowice qualifiers but ignore others such as the MLG Spring Arena qualifiers or the NASL 3 qualifiers. Why is that? What criteria did you use to inclue MSI Pro Cup #4 but not MSI Pro Cup #13? Just an oversight? It's actually a pretty monumental task, populating a database with "all" pro SC2 games ever played. We're only a handful of people doing this on a voluntary basis. If you notice something missing, as Grovbolle and Conti said, and just post a link to the results here in this thread. If you want I can get you a submitter account so you can push stuff yourself, too. I think it's pretty quick and painless. Pretty sure that we have the most complete database available anywhere at the time being, but as you have pointed out yourself, it's hardly perfect yet. Edit: Thanks a lot!! I don't want to be critical of your efforts, because it is alot of work and having looked through Stephano's match records it does seem pretty comprehensive (bar those 2012 results I noted above). I don't want to give the impression that I am whining or attempting to discredit your work. The opposite is true, I am impressed and pleased that such a sterling effort has been undertaken. I was just curious about some results that I had noticed were absent. It is perfectly understandable that some results were simply overlooked. 2012 had a ton of tournaments pretty much constantly and the games did not really ever stop. It is my limited understanding of your ranking system that means players get points based on the current rank of players they beat, so missing games can potentially significantly change the accuracy for numerous players. So adding in those results I have spotted were missing should lead to more complete and accurate rankings. Thanks for your efforts for the scene. I do appreciate it. Finished adding the IPTL Season 1 Divisions. Both the Premier and the contender division. Should be updated with the next list I think Thanks for the swift update! Appreciate it!
The maps aren't "counted" yet though, so you won't see its effect before TheBB updates the entire thing.
No problem, it is pretty easy to add as long as there are complete records, courtesy of liquipedia <3
|
On January 12 2013 04:39 Grovbolle wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 04:36 revel8 wrote:On January 12 2013 04:25 Grovbolle wrote:On January 12 2013 02:26 revel8 wrote:On January 12 2013 02:07 TheBB wrote:On January 12 2013 01:03 revel8 wrote:
I am curious as to why some tournaments matches are included but some are ignored. I noticed that Stephano's win in MSI Pro Cup 13 has been ignored. Also you include some qualifiers like the IEM Katowice qualifiers but ignore others such as the MLG Spring Arena qualifiers or the NASL 3 qualifiers. Why is that? What criteria did you use to inclue MSI Pro Cup #4 but not MSI Pro Cup #13? Just an oversight? It's actually a pretty monumental task, populating a database with "all" pro SC2 games ever played. We're only a handful of people doing this on a voluntary basis. If you notice something missing, as Grovbolle and Conti said, and just post a link to the results here in this thread. If you want I can get you a submitter account so you can push stuff yourself, too. I think it's pretty quick and painless. Pretty sure that we have the most complete database available anywhere at the time being, but as you have pointed out yourself, it's hardly perfect yet. Edit: Thanks a lot!! I don't want to be critical of your efforts, because it is alot of work and having looked through Stephano's match records it does seem pretty comprehensive (bar those 2012 results I noted above). I don't want to give the impression that I am whining or attempting to discredit your work. The opposite is true, I am impressed and pleased that such a sterling effort has been undertaken. I was just curious about some results that I had noticed were absent. It is perfectly understandable that some results were simply overlooked. 2012 had a ton of tournaments pretty much constantly and the games did not really ever stop. It is my limited understanding of your ranking system that means players get points based on the current rank of players they beat, so missing games can potentially significantly change the accuracy for numerous players. So adding in those results I have spotted were missing should lead to more complete and accurate rankings. Thanks for your efforts for the scene. I do appreciate it. Finished adding the IPTL Season 1 Divisions. Both the Premier and the contender division. Should be updated with the next list I think Thanks for the swift update! Appreciate it! The maps aren't "counted" yet though, so you won't see its effect before TheBB updates the entire thing. No problem, it is pretty easy to add as long as there are complete records, courtesy of liquipedia <3
MSI pro cup and GD Studio arena 1 and 2 are added as well
EDIT: liquipedia is amazing, isn't it <3
|
COME ON JAEDONG!
KEEP KICKING ASS GOGO <3.
|
Just added the MLG Spring Invite only qualifiers for US, KR and EU.
I added the EU ones on the wrong date, but still within the same period, and it is only 3 days so you will have to survive with that...
Too many matches to redo :-P
|
This is such an awesome website, thanks for this :D Also, does anyone else miss when Puma topped the elo (at least according the list) and DRG was the best vs Protoss but still was called the Terran killer?
|
On January 12 2013 04:39 Grovbolle wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 04:36 revel8 wrote:On January 12 2013 04:25 Grovbolle wrote:On January 12 2013 02:26 revel8 wrote:On January 12 2013 02:07 TheBB wrote:On January 12 2013 01:03 revel8 wrote:
I am curious as to why some tournaments matches are included but some are ignored. I noticed that Stephano's win in MSI Pro Cup 13 has been ignored. Also you include some qualifiers like the IEM Katowice qualifiers but ignore others such as the MLG Spring Arena qualifiers or the NASL 3 qualifiers. Why is that? What criteria did you use to inclue MSI Pro Cup #4 but not MSI Pro Cup #13? Just an oversight? It's actually a pretty monumental task, populating a database with "all" pro SC2 games ever played. We're only a handful of people doing this on a voluntary basis. If you notice something missing, as Grovbolle and Conti said, and just post a link to the results here in this thread. If you want I can get you a submitter account so you can push stuff yourself, too. I think it's pretty quick and painless. Pretty sure that we have the most complete database available anywhere at the time being, but as you have pointed out yourself, it's hardly perfect yet. Edit: Thanks a lot!! I don't want to be critical of your efforts, because it is alot of work and having looked through Stephano's match records it does seem pretty comprehensive (bar those 2012 results I noted above). I don't want to give the impression that I am whining or attempting to discredit your work. The opposite is true, I am impressed and pleased that such a sterling effort has been undertaken. I was just curious about some results that I had noticed were absent. It is perfectly understandable that some results were simply overlooked. 2012 had a ton of tournaments pretty much constantly and the games did not really ever stop. It is my limited understanding of your ranking system that means players get points based on the current rank of players they beat, so missing games can potentially significantly change the accuracy for numerous players. So adding in those results I have spotted were missing should lead to more complete and accurate rankings. Thanks for your efforts for the scene. I do appreciate it. Finished adding the IPTL Season 1 Divisions. Both the Premier and the contender division. Should be updated with the next list I think Thanks for the swift update! Appreciate it! The maps aren't "counted" yet though, so you won't see its effect before TheBB updates the entire thing. No problem, it is pretty easy to add as long as there are complete records, courtesy of liquipedia <3
Just spotted a few more mistakes.
Firstly, the MLG Spring Arena 2 Euro qualifiers games have been added but the Socke-Stephano result is given 5-3 to the German when it was actually 5-3 in Stephano's favour (as an aggregation of 2 series).
Relevent games were on May 10th 2012
http://aligulac.com/players/10/results/
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2012_MLG_Pro_Circuit/Spring/Qualifier/Invite/Europe
----------------------------------
Secondly, the MLG Summer Arena results for Stephano against Oz are listed as 2-1 and 4-1 to Oz. The scores were actually 2-1 and 2-0 to Oz for an aggregated total of 4-1 to the Korean.
The first series (2-1) was on July 21st 2012, the second series (2-0) was played on July 22nd 2012.
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2012_MLG_Pro_Circuit/Summer/Arena
|
On January 12 2013 23:11 revel8 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 04:39 Grovbolle wrote:On January 12 2013 04:36 revel8 wrote:On January 12 2013 04:25 Grovbolle wrote:On January 12 2013 02:26 revel8 wrote:On January 12 2013 02:07 TheBB wrote:On January 12 2013 01:03 revel8 wrote:
I am curious as to why some tournaments matches are included but some are ignored. I noticed that Stephano's win in MSI Pro Cup 13 has been ignored. Also you include some qualifiers like the IEM Katowice qualifiers but ignore others such as the MLG Spring Arena qualifiers or the NASL 3 qualifiers. Why is that? What criteria did you use to inclue MSI Pro Cup #4 but not MSI Pro Cup #13? Just an oversight? It's actually a pretty monumental task, populating a database with "all" pro SC2 games ever played. We're only a handful of people doing this on a voluntary basis. If you notice something missing, as Grovbolle and Conti said, and just post a link to the results here in this thread. If you want I can get you a submitter account so you can push stuff yourself, too. I think it's pretty quick and painless. Pretty sure that we have the most complete database available anywhere at the time being, but as you have pointed out yourself, it's hardly perfect yet. Edit: Thanks a lot!! I don't want to be critical of your efforts, because it is alot of work and having looked through Stephano's match records it does seem pretty comprehensive (bar those 2012 results I noted above). I don't want to give the impression that I am whining or attempting to discredit your work. The opposite is true, I am impressed and pleased that such a sterling effort has been undertaken. I was just curious about some results that I had noticed were absent. It is perfectly understandable that some results were simply overlooked. 2012 had a ton of tournaments pretty much constantly and the games did not really ever stop. It is my limited understanding of your ranking system that means players get points based on the current rank of players they beat, so missing games can potentially significantly change the accuracy for numerous players. So adding in those results I have spotted were missing should lead to more complete and accurate rankings. Thanks for your efforts for the scene. I do appreciate it. Finished adding the IPTL Season 1 Divisions. Both the Premier and the contender division. Should be updated with the next list I think Thanks for the swift update! Appreciate it! The maps aren't "counted" yet though, so you won't see its effect before TheBB updates the entire thing. No problem, it is pretty easy to add as long as there are complete records, courtesy of liquipedia <3 Just spotted a few more mistakes. Firstly, the MLG Spring Arena 2 Euro qualifiers games have been added but the Socke-Stephano result is given 5-3 to the German when it was actually 5-3 in Stephano's favour (as an aggregation of 2 series). Relevent games were on May 10th 2012 http://aligulac.com/players/10/results/http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2012_MLG_Pro_Circuit/Spring/Qualifier/Invite/Europe---------------------------------- Secondly, the MLG Summer Arena results for Stephano against Oz are listed as 2-1 and 4-1 to Oz. The scores were actually 2-1 and 2-0 to Oz for an aggregated total of 4-1 to the Korean. The first series (2-1) was on July 21st 2012, the second series (2-0) was played on July 22nd 2012. http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2012_MLG_Pro_Circuit/Summer/Arena
Holy shit, good catch. Will edit. Sorry about that.
Edit: The Socke-Stephano match was my fault, did them last night. Doing 200+ results in a row gives a slip-up once in a while.
The other 1 I am trying to find in the database, takes some time though
Edit2: Just changed the other 1 as well. Problem is that those events have been automatically pulled, and aligulac doesn't understand/recognize how the extended series system works, so it will assign 2 matches. One being 2-1 and one being 4-1
|
On January 12 2013 23:11 revel8 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 12 2013 04:39 Grovbolle wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 04:36 revel8 wrote:On January 12 2013 04:25 Grovbolle wrote:On January 12 2013 02:26 revel8 wrote:On January 12 2013 02:07 TheBB wrote:On January 12 2013 01:03 revel8 wrote:
I am curious as to why some tournaments matches are included but some are ignored. I noticed that Stephano's win in MSI Pro Cup 13 has been ignored. Also you include some qualifiers like the IEM Katowice qualifiers but ignore others such as the MLG Spring Arena qualifiers or the NASL 3 qualifiers. Why is that? What criteria did you use to inclue MSI Pro Cup #4 but not MSI Pro Cup #13? Just an oversight? It's actually a pretty monumental task, populating a database with "all" pro SC2 games ever played. We're only a handful of people doing this on a voluntary basis. If you notice something missing, as Grovbolle and Conti said, and just post a link to the results here in this thread. If you want I can get you a submitter account so you can push stuff yourself, too. I think it's pretty quick and painless. Pretty sure that we have the most complete database available anywhere at the time being, but as you have pointed out yourself, it's hardly perfect yet. Edit: Thanks a lot!! I don't want to be critical of your efforts, because it is alot of work and having looked through Stephano's match records it does seem pretty comprehensive (bar those 2012 results I noted above). I don't want to give the impression that I am whining or attempting to discredit your work. The opposite is true, I am impressed and pleased that such a sterling effort has been undertaken. I was just curious about some results that I had noticed were absent. It is perfectly understandable that some results were simply overlooked. 2012 had a ton of tournaments pretty much constantly and the games did not really ever stop. It is my limited understanding of your ranking system that means players get points based on the current rank of players they beat, so missing games can potentially significantly change the accuracy for numerous players. So adding in those results I have spotted were missing should lead to more complete and accurate rankings. Thanks for your efforts for the scene. I do appreciate it. Finished adding the IPTL Season 1 Divisions. Both the Premier and the contender division. Should be updated with the next list I think Thanks for the swift update! Appreciate it! The maps aren't "counted" yet though, so you won't see its effect before TheBB updates the entire thing. No problem, it is pretty easy to add as long as there are complete records, courtesy of liquipedia <3 Just spotted a few more mistakes. Firstly, the MLG Spring Arena 2 Euro qualifiers games have been added but the Socke-Stephano result is given 5-3 to the German when it was actually 5-3 in Stephano's favour (as an aggregation of 2 series). Relevent games were on May 10th 2012 http://aligulac.com/players/10/results/http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2012_MLG_Pro_Circuit/Spring/Qualifier/Invite/Europe---------------------------------- Secondly, the MLG Summer Arena results for Stephano against Oz are listed as 2-1 and 4-1 to Oz. The scores were actually 2-1 and 2-0 to Oz for an aggregated total of 4-1 to the Korean. The first series (2-1) was on July 21st 2012, the second series (2-0) was played on July 22nd 2012. http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2012_MLG_Pro_Circuit/Summer/Arena
You are pretty useful. Have you memorized any results that aren't Stephano's?
|
On January 12 2013 23:37 TheBB wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 23:11 revel8 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 12 2013 04:39 Grovbolle wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 04:36 revel8 wrote:On January 12 2013 04:25 Grovbolle wrote:On January 12 2013 02:26 revel8 wrote:On January 12 2013 02:07 TheBB wrote:On January 12 2013 01:03 revel8 wrote:
I am curious as to why some tournaments matches are included but some are ignored. I noticed that Stephano's win in MSI Pro Cup 13 has been ignored. Also you include some qualifiers like the IEM Katowice qualifiers but ignore others such as the MLG Spring Arena qualifiers or the NASL 3 qualifiers. Why is that? What criteria did you use to inclue MSI Pro Cup #4 but not MSI Pro Cup #13? Just an oversight? It's actually a pretty monumental task, populating a database with "all" pro SC2 games ever played. We're only a handful of people doing this on a voluntary basis. If you notice something missing, as Grovbolle and Conti said, and just post a link to the results here in this thread. If you want I can get you a submitter account so you can push stuff yourself, too. I think it's pretty quick and painless. Pretty sure that we have the most complete database available anywhere at the time being, but as you have pointed out yourself, it's hardly perfect yet. Edit: Thanks a lot!! I don't want to be critical of your efforts, because it is alot of work and having looked through Stephano's match records it does seem pretty comprehensive (bar those 2012 results I noted above). I don't want to give the impression that I am whining or attempting to discredit your work. The opposite is true, I am impressed and pleased that such a sterling effort has been undertaken. I was just curious about some results that I had noticed were absent. It is perfectly understandable that some results were simply overlooked. 2012 had a ton of tournaments pretty much constantly and the games did not really ever stop. It is my limited understanding of your ranking system that means players get points based on the current rank of players they beat, so missing games can potentially significantly change the accuracy for numerous players. So adding in those results I have spotted were missing should lead to more complete and accurate rankings. Thanks for your efforts for the scene. I do appreciate it. Finished adding the IPTL Season 1 Divisions. Both the Premier and the contender division. Should be updated with the next list I think Thanks for the swift update! Appreciate it! The maps aren't "counted" yet though, so you won't see its effect before TheBB updates the entire thing. No problem, it is pretty easy to add as long as there are complete records, courtesy of liquipedia <3 Just spotted a few more mistakes. Firstly, the MLG Spring Arena 2 Euro qualifiers games have been added but the Socke-Stephano result is given 5-3 to the German when it was actually 5-3 in Stephano's favour (as an aggregation of 2 series). Relevent games were on May 10th 2012 http://aligulac.com/players/10/results/http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2012_MLG_Pro_Circuit/Spring/Qualifier/Invite/Europe---------------------------------- Secondly, the MLG Summer Arena results for Stephano against Oz are listed as 2-1 and 4-1 to Oz. The scores were actually 2-1 and 2-0 to Oz for an aggregated total of 4-1 to the Korean. The first series (2-1) was on July 21st 2012, the second series (2-0) was played on July 22nd 2012. http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2012_MLG_Pro_Circuit/Summer/Arena You are pretty useful. Have you memorized any results that aren't Stephano's?
I have not really looked at anyone else's to such detail. Haha!
Stephano's results (win or lose) tend to generate lots of discussion/arguing, so I did keep a log of his results over the summer to track his progress and help me present factual based points!
Keep up the good work. I am very impressed.
|
Just noticed there's a mistake with Iron Squid ro16 results, DRG vs Creator should be 3-1, you have 3-2.
|
On January 13 2013 14:23 sitromit wrote:
Just noticed there's a mistake with Iron Squid ro16 results, DRG vs Creator should be 3-1, you have 3-2.
Thanks! Fixed.
|
Great stats i guess every top zerg need great zvz training other matches no need zerg win it by self :D See ironsquid ......
|
Gogo Zerg =) Overrun them all!
|
TargA & Snute #1! Congrats!!
|
On January 13 2013 21:03 mjuuy wrote:
TargA & Snute #1! Congrats!!
Technically 92 & 36 but I like your enthusiasm :D
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
