This is a thread on ladder and rating system policy, split off from another thread.
The main questions discussed here are:
- Should W/L be displayed in the ladder?
- Should we have a ladder reset option?
Summary points:
- W/L isn't an accurate reflection of anything. Winning against a 1000 player is completely different from winning against a 1700 player, but the count doesn't say who you won against, only what you won. The other rating numbers are much more accurate in terms of measuring how good you are; W/L is very misleading about what it means.
- Suspect tests often use total games played and apparently also W/L to determine qualifications. This is weird and should probably not be done.
- Some people like to see how many wins/losses they've had (either in a run or overall), more for sentimental value than because it means anything. This is a use-case we should support.
P.S. ignore the Like from blarajan, the forum software is dumb so I had to edit one of my earlier posts to split off this thread.
The main questions discussed here are:
- Should W/L be displayed in the ladder?
- Should we have a ladder reset option?
Summary points:
- W/L isn't an accurate reflection of anything. Winning against a 1000 player is completely different from winning against a 1700 player, but the count doesn't say who you won against, only what you won. The other rating numbers are much more accurate in terms of measuring how good you are; W/L is very misleading about what it means.
- Suspect tests often use total games played and apparently also W/L to determine qualifications. This is weird and should probably not be done.
- Some people like to see how many wins/losses they've had (either in a run or overall), more for sentimental value than because it means anything. This is a use-case we should support.
P.S. ignore the Like from blarajan, the forum software is dumb so I had to edit one of my earlier posts to split off this thread.
Last edited: