FargoRate: World Top 100 with recent changes
- Thread starter mikepage
- Start date
Too much to comment on here, but you've got it, more or less, right with the Americans: SVB, Dechaine, and Bergman are clearly the only three Americans who are World Top 25 and no one else is even close. The scary part is that we'll send at most one of them to this year's Mosconi.
Does it seem like all the pros are slowly climbing higher as a group? Maybe I remember wrong but at one point there was maybe one player or two in the 800s.
Having Joshua as top 6 in the world is crazy, kid just learned to shave a week ago or something LOL. I don't mean he does not deserve to be ranked that way, just for the skill for his age. I guess Wu was the same way and maybe even younger.
And Eklenti is only 18 (maybe 19 now) and is 13.
Having Joshua as top 6 in the world is crazy, kid just learned to shave a week ago or something LOL. I don't mean he does not deserve to be ranked that way, just for the skill for his age. I guess Wu was the same way and maybe even younger.
And Eklenti is only 18 (maybe 19 now) and is 13.
Last edited:
I'm guessing that players who move only one place and less than one rating point are not marked.
I think that rating creep is possible because there is no absolute reference for the rating scale. Since all the ratings are relative to other players (100 points means twice the scoring rate) it doesn't really make any difference when comparing players.
It would be possible to set a standard by adjusting everyone up or down so the top 20 or 30 established players have an average rating of 800 or so.
Yes, to keep it less cluttered I think i noted any changes for the top 10, changes or two spots or more for the middle crowd and 3 or more near the bottom.
But I think Gideon means "I don't understand how a Canadian can go down, under any circumstances...."
Yeah, but Gideon was polite about it, like most Canucks...
He wrote “I’m sure I’m missing something.”
Nothing crazy... But he played about 80 games at the Japan open (including qualifying rounds) performing at about 800 speed and went up a handful of points. There are enough players close together so that you can go up a lot of places with not that many points.
Aha; thanks, I didn't follow that event.
No, that's only when you started suggesting we weren't inherently better at hockey. I grudgingly accept that we can go down in other fields.
Mike, do older wins ever diminish in relevance or roll off?
Respectfully, Matt
(I don’t take myself too seriously. I hope you can return the favor.)
Respectfully, Matt
(I don’t take myself too seriously. I hope you can return the favor.)
I wonder if Kiamco will go up after his convincing win over the weekend.
https://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=438483&page=14
Post #210
One-year-old games are worth about 80% of a game played today
1 year: 80%
3 years 50%
6 years 25%
10 years 10%
Post #210
One-year-old games are worth about 80% of a game played today
1 year: 80%
3 years 50%
6 years 25%
10 years 10%
I have a question for Mike Page.
Is this system able to assess what someone's rating would have been in a historical sense?
For example,based on the Efren vs Earl race to 120,could you have given them a number based on that set or would it take more data than that? Thanks in advance,Tommy D.
Is this system able to assess what someone's rating would have been in a historical sense?
For example,based on the Efren vs Earl race to 120,could you have given them a number based on that set or would it take more data than that? Thanks in advance,Tommy D.
I want to see the bottom 100 players
