Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
Ryan, I'd like to take into account pools too so that everyone gets on the ELO.Here are the ELO ratings from AUSOM 4Ever:
![]()
These ratings only take into account bracket matches, and do not necessarily reflect exact placement in the tournament. As we get more and more tournaments entered into this system, the ratings will begin to more accurately reflect player skill (in ASL tournaments).
EDIT: For those curious, I use the standard ELO formula on a match-by-match basis, starting first with the winner's bracket and then moving to the loser's. I can upload the program I made for this if people are interested.
I'll have to edit the program since it will take a very different algorithm to enter Round Robin results, but I'll work on that ASAP.Ryan, I'd like to take into account pools too so that everyone gets on the ELO.
like ryker said the last one, didn't have doubles.Rag, I'm pretty sure all of the tournaments should feature doubles....AFAIK. There's no reason there wouldn't be doubles.
Yeah, and we was pissed.Iron Brawl didn't run them last time, if you remember.
I'm sorry but whatever algorithm you used there most likely needs to be revamped or you have an error. If those ratings are based purely off ONLY the bracket matches at AUSOM4 then you should essentially have the players in order of their bracket placings. Placings at a tournament always come first when ranking players overall, it's always been the case. The brackets were seeded with pools so I can't even see any large amount of "bracket ****" going on.Here are the ELO ratings from AUSOM 4Ever:
I don't think it's based on matches as if it were a tournament. I think it's based solely on who beat who.I'm sorry but whatever algorithm you used there most likely needs to be revamped or you have an error. If those ratings are based purely off ONLY the bracket matches at AUSOM4 then you should essentially have the players in order of their bracket placings. Placings at a tournament always come first when ranking players overall, it's always been the case. The brackets were seeded with pools so I can't even see any large amount of "bracket ****" going on.
Even if you use a person's match counts in the bracket, they should be weighted extremely less than bracket placing and in the future could even be additionally weighted based off their opponent's previous "current placement" but since this is the first tournament and no one had a placement, that would be null for these calculations.
I actually only mildly care about my placement on this since it might be considered nationally or looked at by others. I'm sorry if I offended you but there's just no way you can justify placements like George (placed 9th) getting 6th on the rankings or even 4GOD (placed 5th) getting 3rd/4th on the rankings. If you want to PM me the details and try to explain it to me in a PM, go for it. I don't think I want to start a huge discussion in this thread though.
Learn to double BDACUS*gets 4th, ranked 8th*
pretty legit.
Then how did George get so high? He didnt even beat anyone ranked. He only won one winners bracket match on top of that.I don't think it's based on matches as if it were a tournament. I think it's based solely on who beat who.
O ya no problem of course. We were just curious.We'll figure it out, don't worry. We haven't even factored in pools yet. Ingulit is the one that ran the ELO Rankings program, so he'll have to answer your questions. Forgive him though if he can't respond immediately; he is the T.O. for the Iron Brawl II on the 12th, so he has a lot to do.
Hell if I know. I haven't seen the bracket.Then how did George get so high? He didnt even beat anyone ranked. He only won one winners bracket match on top of that.
My suggestion:
Get rid of ELO and let me be in charge of the rankings by myself
This is exactly what happened, actually; the more matches you play at the start of a season when everyone is 1600, the higher your rank. However, if that happens, if you eventually lose a match to people who have played fewer matches, your rank should theoretically go down significantly (and vice versa for the actual winner).I read the website you linked and the algorithms are good. They're very single match dependent though. So players who play more matches overall can end up with a higher rating since starting clean like this, everyone is 1600 like you said (this is why George got ranked so high).
I think I'm going to keep two rankings, one that's overall and one per season. The overall one should balance nicely between seasons, and I'm curious to see how it pans out.Theoretically, the ELO ratings SHOULD balance out to be more accurate over time (if attendance is consistent) but I'm afraid you might not get accurate enough results with only 5 tournaments hosted in the season. I could be wrong though so keep at it and I'm eager to see what happens and if it works out.
Awesome, will do! I originally made this program for my campus's Smash club's weekly tournaments and it works wonderfully there, so I think it should turn out pretty well for the ASL soon as well; we just need more data.However, if it does not work out... I don't think your program should go to waste and I have some ideas on how to maybe take the ELO algorithms and modify them to work more accurate for Brawl tournaments. If ELO doesn't pan out and you're interested, you should contact me on Skype sometime and we can see if any of my ideas are good. PM me for my Skype acc if you want it or ask Cam.
There should only be a soft reset between seasons as opposed to a hard one.I think I'm going to keep two rankings, one that's overall and one per season. The overall one should balance nicely between seasons, and I'm curious to see how it pans out.