1
Yes, there are. And they are welcome to merge them. However, most of these have centered around "epeen" vs. "game the system." I have no interest in either of these things. I don't care in the slightest if Elo scores are public or private. I don't plan on gaming anything. But, I really, really want feedback to my performance. I strongly believe that if you are going to do something, it is important to strive for improvement, and it is impossible to do that without some kind of metric (be it matches against better players, tournaments, or some kind of score).
Oh, and it doesn't take 1000 matches to equilibrate an Elo score. It likely doesn't even take 100 for most people. Many organizations (say chess for example) use a 20 game provisional period. It depends on the matchmaker variance (in match selection) and the k-factor. And it is certainly complicated by the presence of teams, but one of the major advantages of Elo is the speed of equilibration.
For more information see:
http://en.wikipedia....sed_by_the_USCF
Or better yet:
http://www.glicko.ne...ch/acjpaper.pdf
--
Troggy
Rakura, on 22 February 2013 - 08:51 AM, said:
Theres like 5 other threads on this ... currently speaking with the way matchmaking was originally released they dont have enough data to show everyones rating... furthermore if you know ANYTHING about how an ELO rating truly works you would realize that unless you have 1000 games played your not ever gonna know what your true rating is.
