If a team plays 1000 games, and draws 10%, loses 90% then it will find itself at or near the top. Vote chess rankings is as meaningless as member points.
ELO system for Vote Chess
Sort:
Most Recent
Forum Legend
Following
New Comments
Locked Topic
Pinned Topic
I don't agree.
Vote Leaderboard is a cumulative representative of all the vote chess games, so the more games you play, you will remain on the top of the leaderboard. If you become inactive, you will be overtaken by other teams.
OTOH, if teams are given elo points, any team with a single 2600 + player can play few strong teams and reach the top in a matter of days. And once they are in the top, they may avoid playing games so that they don't lose elo. As it should be, Vote Chess and Team Match leaderboard positions are gained by teams with constant hard work by members and admins and it should take enough time for a team to come to the top and it should not be at the drop of a hat, which may happen with elo.
And this may encourage engine use in vote chess. A cheater with his engine will play top 4 teams, beat them all and be at the top of the leaderboard. OTOH, with the current system, even if the cheater beats the top 4 teams, his team just gains 20 VC points and it will take him much more time to reach the top.
My conclusion is that reaching the top should be hard.
Absolutely not true. The current system measures activity, not strength.