Ratings Deflation?

Sort:
Avatar of Martin_Stahl
Chessiosaurus wrote:

Ratings are massively deflated in the sub 1000 category and you don't even need to be a statistics guru to see this - just look at the distribution curve, the average rating of players now is around 500 and moving rapidly downwards, in a glicko or elo system the average should be 1200 so that's enormously off the curve but because those aren't the grand masters or celebrity streamers rating range nobody really cares to point it out as the pairing algorithm keeps the top 0.1 percentile shielded in their protective bubble.

I've watched sub 1000 players stream too and the standard is nowhere near the suck fest you would expect, many are playing more like what used to be 1200-1600 standard games but simply can't improve because the rampant deflation and algorithm traps them down in the pit of despair

The site has multiple different starting ratings possible. There's nothing inherent in the system that would cause it to have an average of 1200

Avatar of emoore5431
Chessiosaurus wrote:

Ratings are massively deflated in the sub 1000 category and you don't even need to be a statistics guru to see this - just look at the distribution curve, the average rating of players now is around 500 and moving rapidly downwards, in a glicko or elo system the average should be 1200 so that's enormously off the curve but because those aren't the grand masters or celebrity streamers rating range nobody really cares to point it out as the pairing algorithm keeps the top percentile shielded in their protective bubble.

I've watched sub 1000 players stream too and the standard is nowhere near the suck fest you would expect, many are playing more like what used to be 1200-1600 standard games but simply can't improve because the rampant deflation and algorithm traps them down in the pit of despair

Yeah—if 1200 is meant to be the average but is actually the 95th or 99th percentile, then that’s pretty massive inflation, even without considering player’s skill increase over time.

Avatar of emoore5431
Martin_Stahl wrote:
Chessiosaurus wrote:

Ratings are massively deflated in the sub 1000 category and you don't even need to be a statistics guru to see this - just look at the distribution curve, the average rating of players now is around 500 and moving rapidly downwards, in a glicko or elo system the average should be 1200 so that's enormously off the curve but because those aren't the grand masters or celebrity streamers rating range nobody really cares to point it out as the pairing algorithm keeps the top percentile shielded in their protective bubble.

I've watched sub 1000 players stream too and the standard is nowhere near the suck fest you would expect, many are playing more like what used to be 1200-1600 standard games but simply can't improve because the rampant deflation and algorithm traps them down in the pit of despair

The site has multiple different starting ratings possible. There's nothing inherent in the system that would cause it to have an average of 1200

Would you say that it’s a good thing for there to be no form of rating regulation? Maybe it’s alright as a matchmaking tool as-is, but if that’s the case then sites with heavily inflated ratings have no less credibility. Basically, it’s nice if it means something, otherwise we should just track player percentile and call it good for matchmaking. Without regulation, the purpose of ‘elo’ as a unique abstracted number to measure growth or skill means nothing.