Menu

Rankings

by Ross Pomerantz » 2010-06-20 17:21:39 #5026

My rankings on the games are good how come my over all is terirble?

by kimvictoria330 » 2010-06-20 06:26:11 #6929

terrible? really? I think you're doing awesome! Peace man . . .

by fizzbut » 2010-06-20 06:39:08 #6930

You didn't complete games 1491 and 1493. The main part of your overall ranking is based on the last 30 days. Catch those 2 games up and you should see a boost in your ranking. Rankings are based on time and moves.

by lilybelle » 2010-07-20 12:58:01 #6931

Ross: If I could get down to your numbers, I would be elated. Look at all the SCx who are playing!

by usedart » 2010-09-29 13:20:04 #6932

I'm still not too sure how the scoring is done. I just figured out that between games 1592 and 1625 I'm 8 minutes and 22 seconds faster than Fizz but yet I am still about 40 points behind him and yet only about 15 or so points behind with least moves... How is that so?

by fizzbut » 2010-10-01 16:05:03 #6933

Wow that's alot of figuring to do

by Mikhail Swift » 2010-10-01 14:26:17 #6934

What's helped my ranking out is to go back to old games and improve on them. I've tried to get all my games below 3 minutes (though there are still a couple lingering) and under 2 minutes if I can. I'm not near as fast as some of the really good players that are beating them sub 1 minute, but I've seen my rank climb from around 99 to the low 60s now because of it.

by usedart » 2010-10-01 16:12:09 #6935

Not really that much figuring, and a lot less complex than some of the SC puzzles... Also, are the players rated by the number of years they've been playing as well? Are the number of attempts one tries a game a factor?

by usedart » 2010-10-02 16:55:49 #6936

I'd like to have some sense of how the bar is set before I go after Dilip and JoeK... ;-> How much of the main part of my ranking is based on the last thirty days???

by fizzbut » 2010-10-03 10:54:25 #6937

I don't know for sure. I reread Adam's explanation when he was changing the scoring system and it's not that clear. I suppose we could try asking the administrator. I do know faster and lower moves always helps.

by usedart » 2010-10-03 15:26:12 #6938

As far as I have read the scoring system was changed years ago and it is still not that clear...

by fizzbut » 2010-10-03 12:05:12 #6939

June of 2008. and here's all Adam said about it.
"The new ranking system calculates your score for the games that were generated in the last 30 days. Your average time and moves for older games are then added to the score. Additionally, only people who have played a game in the last 30 days will be ranked."

by usedart » 2010-10-04 17:22:40 #6940

"Average times and moves for older games are then added to the score" Are those older games just those played within the last thirty days? Just curious...

by fizzbut » 2010-10-04 10:31:02 #6941

No I think he means older then 30 days. If he's just adding the average older games would only count as 1/30th of your total score.

by usedart » 2010-10-05 07:40:22 #6942

Thanks Fizz... I did go back and see Adam's explanation of how the older games were averaged in and I'm still wondering how far back those games go. Three months, six months, a year or possibly two? I'd like to see the scoring system reflect just the the last thirty days so newcomers would have a chance at the top positions.

by fizzbut » 2010-10-05 09:41:51 #6943

I believe it's an average of games played not playable games. So unplayed games would not effect your average which would give newcomers no disadvantage.

by fizzbut » 2010-10-05 09:44:51 #6944

Actually I just realized that could give a newcomer an advantage, if you go back and play only games that have low moves.

by usedart » 2010-10-05 12:46:57 #6945

My feelings are that a player who has consistently played with the lowest moves and the fastest times over a thirty day period should be ranked accordingly. This would allow somebody to take an extended hiatus and not have to be concerned with an "overall average". It would also keep the competition for the top fresh as well as attainable to anyone who has the fortitude to meet that challenge. As it appears, the top players are now those who have been playing for several years and who have also accumulated a higher average based on several hundreds of games played.

by fizzbut » 2010-10-05 14:57:54 #6946

Well I've asked the Administrator. This system is far better then the old. I didn't play much the first year and it took me a year of playing to get my ranking into the 30's.

by cunningstunt » 2010-10-06 15:47:41 #6947

I've been reading this thread and have seen explanations on ranking numbers; I don't know about "score".
My score goes up and it goes down. Yes, my overall score goes down.
Why would that be? I have no unfinished games (other than impossibles).

What makes that score number go up and down - in the course of a day or over a month?