42 coaches online • Server time: 19:44
Forum Chat
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Creating a custom to...goto Post Secret League Americ...goto Post DOTP Season 4
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Malmir



Joined: May 20, 2008

Post   Posted: Jan 26, 2023 - 22:26 Reply with quote Back to top

I've never been overly bothered by coach rating but I actually like the new rating. Everyone gets diced and when I do I no longer plummet. I just lost to an emerging start and went down 0.5 (by comparison to the old rating) points as opposed to 9.716 Always felt a bit silly to me. Might give it a bit more credibility.
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Jan 26, 2023 - 22:57 Reply with quote Back to top

Malmir wrote:
I've never been overly bothered by coach rating but I actually like the new rating. Everyone gets diced and when I do I no longer plummet.

I noticed that as well, it seems to consider the possibility of the odd dicing and thus is more "forgiving" than old CR. I like the Glicko 2 as well.
ClayInfinity



Joined: Aug 15, 2003

Post   Posted: Jan 27, 2023 - 00:38 Reply with quote Back to top

Kinks wrote:
Maybe I've misunderstood, but I thought the old data was being used under the new formula. That would seem to be the case as everyone's CR wasn't reset.

So I don't think the issue is a lack of data. I like that CR decays, to keep things fresh. However, I think that the new CR calculation is linked to a coaches title is misleading.


It is, but then CR erosion is retrospectively applied so long term high CR/low play rate coaches are dropped hard like a stone down the rankings. My standing as an active coach didnt move me so much in the rankings.

Also, and the bit I am not sure about is, how does old R and B division activity used vs C div (which has been in play for the best part of a year?). If you have NEVER played C, then I think you're virtually reset at the bottom maybe.
SkittleMosaic



Joined: May 17, 2018

Post   Posted: Jan 27, 2023 - 06:38 Reply with quote Back to top

Just went from Superstar/Legend to Experienced, much more likely to play now since I have nothing to lose xD
ArrestedDevelopment



Joined: Sep 14, 2015

Post   Posted: Jan 27, 2023 - 09:14 Reply with quote Back to top

Kinks wrote:
Maybe I've misunderstood, but I thought the old data was being used under the new formula. That would seem to be the case as everyone's CR wasn't reset.

So I don't think the issue is a lack of data. I like that CR decays, to keep things fresh. However, I think that the new CR calculation is linked to a coaches title is misleading.


You misunderstood. The old data may be intended to be processed later, but as of now it is not under consideration - only games played in the C div are (ie. under 2020 rules).
You just didn't notice the "CR reset" because you played games in C prior to the switch to the new system, here's your first game in C: https://fumbbl.com/p/match?id=4342139 (where you are effectively reset at 1350 CR).

The site can't tell you accurately whether someone is winning at, over or under their expected winrate on a regular basis if it doesn't actually have the datapoints. And that's all the CR (and approximately the ranking bands) are trying to do.

_________________
Image
Garion



Joined: Aug 19, 2009

Post   Posted: Jan 27, 2023 - 09:36 Reply with quote Back to top

I think its a good thing. I used to be a legend and very good at blood bowl.
However I'm currently rusty as hell making lots of mistakes and poor positioning compared to how I was at my best. And my CR reflects this. It would be wrong if I was still around legend. Because I'm simply not at the level I was.

My only critique of this and every CR formula is that it doesn't take into account which race you're using. For example I pretty much only played Goblins for a spell and naturally my CR plummeted.
Not saying every race should have a cr modifier, but I always felt using the worst race in the game shouldn't be quite so damaging.

However... It is what it is, and I'm not really bothered if using gobos messes up my CR. There are far more interesting and important changes the site would benefit from. Which many people have PITCHed over the years.

So I just wanna say I love this site and community and fumbbl just goes from strength to strength. All you helpers out there are truly great! Christer... you're not bad either I guess Razz

_________________
Image
koadah



Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: Jan 27, 2023 - 12:36 Reply with quote Back to top

Looking at it from the outside, the number of Legends seems a bit stingy. Wink

I am only seeing 4 Legends followed by around 70 Superstars.
It seems that you have to make the top 150 just to be a star.

The old system seemed more generous.

From a fan point of view, more Legend vs Legend clashes on the current games list are more likely to draw me in as a spec. That may create more of a "buzz" generally.
Would 10, 15, 20 Legends be too many?

_________________
Image
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Stars - Anniversary Bowl - Teams of Stars - 13th March
badger89



Joined: Jun 03, 2014

Post   Posted: Jan 27, 2023 - 12:46 Reply with quote Back to top

I like the new CR as it give everyone a change to get number 1 as the old way people played once in a blue moon to keep around the top 25

_________________
Image
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Jan 27, 2023 - 13:07 Reply with quote Back to top

koadah wrote:
Looking at it from the outside, the number of Legends seems a bit stingy. Wink

I am only seeing 4 Legends followed by around 70 Superstars.
It seems that you have to make the top 150 just to be a star.

The old system seemed more generous.

From a fan point of view, more Legend vs Legend clashes on the current games list are more likely to draw me in as a spec. That may create more of a "buzz" generally.
Would 10, 15, 20 Legends be too many?

I think that the top 5 or 10 coaches in a division should be Legends. 1850 CR seems a bit high to achieve in the Box, especially considering that once you are 1800, you rarely gain more than 3-4 points per game vs close-rating opponent, and close-rating opponents are rare.
It's not a tragedy and the site for sure has other priorities, but just saying, for discussion's sake.
1800 seems high enough to me to consider a coach a Legend.
koadah



Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: Jan 27, 2023 - 13:13 Reply with quote Back to top

Even 10 still seems a bit stingy to me. Though bringing back "Mega-Star" under Legend would sort it.
That might confuse the younglings though. Wink

Right now 1800 would give you 16. Sounds good to me. Smile

_________________
Image
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Stars - Anniversary Bowl - Teams of Stars - 13th March
badger89



Joined: Jun 03, 2014

Post   Posted: Jan 27, 2023 - 13:22 Reply with quote Back to top

Be thankful 🥹 it's not 2500 like chess to become a GM haha

_________________
Image
Tenax



Joined: Jun 09, 2022

Post   Posted: Jan 27, 2023 - 13:31 Reply with quote Back to top

I share Malmir opinion: I am very happy that Christer introduced the Glicko2 for the reasons indicated before.

I may be going a little off topic, but I would also like to say one more general thing on the "Legend" title.

I think that the title of "Legend" should be deserved through deep commitment. So I am very much in favour of a rating drop if the coach for example doesn't play a certain amount of 'competitive' or 'Box' games over a certain period (too easy to get on top and then stop playing and have fun in the league and still stay on top).

And more: the title of coach Legend in my opinion presupposes a real mastery of the game over different races and different TVs. Coaches who want to claim this title should be encouraged to participate in competitive tournaments such as the RRR or Trophy, which could perhaps give additional 'tournament points' to the top winners (on top of the points earned during the matches). I see some legendary coaches who always play in their comfort zone with their four to five super-optimised or min-maxed Tier 1 teams. I would like to ask these 'Legends': prove yourselves by playing 15 games with Goblins blindly on the Box and achieving a 75 per cent win rate in the Trophy.
Wink

Finally, a behavioral aspect: A legend (on top of what I told before) is a champion; and a champion is a gentleman on and off the pitch. but no method of calculation will ever be able to judge this.

Since I joined here I have watched hundreds of matches and I must say that the one who best represents this model for me - today January 2023 - is https://fumbbl.com/~Malmir. Regardless of what his rankings say: a gentleman off and on the field, never a criticism of the rules, helpful comments on the forums, and a very good mastery of the game with several teams/races/TVs (and even if his best results are on Tier 1 teams it seems to me that he even risks playing often with Tier 2 Tier3 teams with very goo results).

An excellent teacher.
koadah



Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: Jan 27, 2023 - 13:39 Reply with quote Back to top

Tenax wrote:
...


I think that the ranks are really more about winning games.

Other things could be denoted by a Hall of Fame icon. Or Major Winner, BBT Winner etc.

_________________
Image
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Stars - Anniversary Bowl - Teams of Stars - 13th March
Nelphine



Joined: Apr 01, 2011

Post   Posted: Jan 27, 2023 - 16:04 Reply with quote Back to top

For me, Tenax' suggestions wouldn't work, specifically because everyone has different opinions about what 'competitive' means. For instance (and i know almost no one else feels this way, but i'm just trying to illustrate a point), I despise low tv (under 1300). RRRs and BBT aren't 'competitive' to me. At the same time, I know some people have no interest in majors, so putting in a requirement about participation in any particular kind of format, I don't think is the way to go.

I think 1850 is fine, personally, because once we have 4 years of playing, there are going to be a lot more people up there. Right now, its very 'new'; and even getting 1 point per game, you'll get there over time - and after people have played thousands of C games, we don't want dozens (or more) of Legends around.
Tenax



Joined: Jun 09, 2022

Post   Posted: Jan 27, 2023 - 18:16 Reply with quote Back to top

Nelphine wrote:
For me, Tenax' suggestions wouldn't work, specifically because everyone has different opinions about what 'competitive' means. For instance (and i know almost no one else feels this way, but i'm just trying to illustrate a point), I despise low tv (under 1300). RRRs and BBT aren't 'competitive' to me


I find RRR and Trophy quite quite challenging. And now that in RRR Inducing StarPlayers has been disallowed is more competitive (avoid the possibility of "Morg's slyes ") I can understand everybody has his "comfort" zone . I am just point out that someone who aspires to be a Legend and who claims to teach others how to play games must be able to master several races, and able to play different TVs.

Then what one likes to do is a matter of taste. I was trying to explain what being a "Legend" coach means to me.
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic