Hi Reddit!
I am hoping to find some math wizards here with knowledge of a ELO/Rating System. I am currently in the process of making a Competitive Team Ranking website for casual gamers, specifically for the game Valorant. Please bear with me, as this question needs some context. I will post a google doc to show how the ELO System will work.
In Valorant, players who choose to play ranked games, are assigned an individual rank after the play a few matches. Once that rank is established, they can begin to climb or fall based off their wins or losses.
Valorant has 8 ranks with 3 divisions separating each rank. Iron to Radiant with 1,2,3 in between each rank. (Gold 1, Iron 2, Plat 3, etc.) The goal of my website is to allow players to create teams to play against other teams and track their wins/loss publicly. To instill competitive integrity, I want to attach an ELO/Rating system to teams based on their individual Valorant Ranks. The starting point for a Teams ELO/Rating is not the issue, because we can figure that out by adding values to individual ranks and then averaging the 5 players to create a team rank.
The problem is when/if teams decide to kick a player for a higher rated individual player. For instance, if a Team of Gold players wanted to recruit a Diamond player, we need to adjust the Team ELO/Rating in order to show the increase in skill now playing on the team.
An example:
5 Gold players create a team and have an average ELO of 400. After playing some games, they are now sitting at a rating of 489, and decide to make some changes by recruiting a new member. A Diamond player, which is likely more skilled than a gold player, joining the team should also affect the teams ELO. How should the teams ELO be appropriately adjusted to a higher skilled person joining the team?
The idea is to avoid people using their starting ELO to trick people into accepting a match with them, only to see (through removing lower ranked members) the team has much higher individually ranked players than their Team ELO suggests.
I will post my ELO System as it currently is. Any and all help on this subject would be greatly appreciated! https://docs.google.com/document/d/12GZ7itfzCoRv5-Jz2BbhyaSVIC0p10TlFxa3MEJG43I/edit?usp=sharing
.
Nah, I'm just kidding.
But can you please, please, please promise those of us who love this game that you'll never, ever dumb it down just to appease the whiners and crybabies?
- your teammate suddenly decides to double team the guy you are defending, leaving his man free. The game suddenly points your arrow to the open man, telling you to switch, but before you can even do that, he receives the ball and scores. You get a 'defensive breakdown'.
- The player you are defending is Ben-Simmons like player from 3, so you intentionally leave him open to encourage him to brick. You get a 'leaves assignment'.
- A 7-footer is backing down your PG in the paint, you double-team to help out. You get 'leaves assignment'. But if you doubled team and forced an error you get a 'good double team'. Literally the same thing.
- Your team wastes the shot clock and gives you the ball with 0.5 seconds left. You fail to put up a shot in time. 'turnover'. You get down rated just as if you threw the ball into the stands.
- The final minute of the game, you are the ball handler and your team is in the lead. You need to of course kill at least 20 seconds off the shot clock, like in real basketball. You get a 'hold ball too long'.
6.) You go for a chase down block as a help defender, but the ball just started it's decent before you could reach it. The basket counts. You get downgraded for a "violation".
Yeah, the title states it already. The voting system as it is implemented here on Reddit inherently stifles dissent. People click "downvote" on things they disagree with, respectively "upvote" on things they can agree with. That would be fine if it wasn't for one effect: comments per default are sorted by votes. Even worse, comments with a strong negative rating are collapsed and effectively hidden by the system.
The effect is that controversial opinions are sent way down to the bottom of the page, out of sight of everyone, while what happens at the very top is mostly circlejerking.
That's not how healthy discussions are lead. A healthy discussion lives on dissent, on arguments, on disapproval, on convincing others from ones views by arguing, by writing down the reasons for ones convictions and accepting it when others dismantle these reasons, being open to being convinced of opposing views. That's a healthy way to debate.
Voting dissenting opinions out of sight without a single counterargument is not a healthy way to debate!
Title
Introduction
Boxing is a sport that has conjured a myriad of controversies in the past. For instance, the highly anticipated GGG Canelo 1 left most fans sour at the contentious scorecards. Boxing is no stranger to questionable calls from its judges. However, despite boxing gaining notoriety for its bad decision, it seems state commissions and sanctioning bodies remain lax in correcting this. Thus, this leads to the suggestion of a system that I believe would greatly benefit boxing. A system designed to hold referees and judges accountable for their decisions. I believe boxing would benefit with the introduction of an ELO rating system for referees and judges
What is an ELO system
The Elo rating system is a method for calculating the relative skill levels of players in zero-sum games such as chess[Wikipedia]
-How it would be administered
The establishment of a separate commission completely independent of sanctioning bodies and state commissions is pivotal. The objectives of commission will be as follows;
- to regulate the judging and refereeing of all boxing bouts
- to maintain and enhance the status of those judges and referees
- to enhance the dignity and integrity of persons practising those occupations
Judges
For judges, a panel of five additional unofficial judges will score the fight. These scores will remain hidden from the judges and will be collected at the end of the bout like normal( this is to prevent altering of a scorecard after scores are read). After an average of all scores is taken, the differential between 5 unofficial judges scores is measured. The difference between the official judges scorecard and the average unofficial judges scorecard will determine points a judge gets for the fight. The maximum will be 5.
Referees
The commission will have to see to the creation of hierarchies within the refereeing scene. Ideally there should be three levels of professional referees; senior referee, junior referee and interim referee. Senior been former highly accredited referees who are now retired. Junior will be currently practicing referees who have officiated at least 20 professional fights and 50 amateur bouts. Interim will be those who haven't reached the junior threshold of 20 professional fights and 50 amateur bouts.
When it comes to the administering of the ELO rating system, a panel of 3 senior referees will heavily scrutinise the decision
... keep reading on reddit ➡Let me start this by saying that my corporate 9-5 job is in training and adult learning.
Woke up again to another random one star. I did 4 shops yesterday and they all went really well with 3 of the 4 having great communication about things out of stock and one person telling me I was the best shopper she’s ever had. The last customer was a brand new one and only had 1 item out of stock and it was marked to refund if not available (it was a single yogurt).
Since I know that customers have 14 days to rate and there is zero information I can get on my ratings without calling support, there is absolutely no chance for me to correlate the customer to the one star and therefore zero chance for me to potentially adjust my actions and how I shop. There are no issues listed under damaged and all other categories show all thumbs up. I also find it difficult to believe that most customers say I’m great but then apparently I turn into trash garbage for others.
Moral of the rant above is that we can’t let ratings get to us because IC has us on a rating system that is set up to fail us by not requiring feedback from the customer that we can review. It leaves us clueless as to if the customer rated is badly on something that was even under our control.
I've been shopping since January and have maintained a 5 star the whole time because I only take good orders and really work at doing a great job. Within one day of me shopping with the new system of "How would you rate your experience?" I got a 4 star and a 2 star rating. Now for two days I've gone hours without a single order and when it does come through it's a $2 tip for 30 miles or some shit. Why are we punished for lower ratings that are frankly usually due to customers not understand they are rating the shopper?! My 30 other 5 star ratings should prove Im doing a good job. Its bad enough that so few people rate, that when you do get a bad one it really affects you.
I would like them to keep some of it to weed out the deadbeat drivers,but some of it is BS.
I have 96 five Star ratings 1 four star 1 three star And 2 one stars.
I totally fucked up someone's order a few weeks ago and definitely deserved a one star( I assume it was them)
The rest are Absolute bullshit though.. I don't think customers understand how it works. If they're not going to leave a 5 star,they may as well leave a 1 star. 100 four star ratings is good in real life. On the app,it will get you deactivated..
Look at League of Legends and their sponsors, That just puts the sport of the game we all love to shame. Why aren't there more orgs in our scene? Not talking about player owned orgs like OG or Secret but players having power will always lead to disastrous consequences without proper management. Don't believe me? See the shitshow that is NA apart from EG. NA Dota can thrive but I do believe they will need imports either from EU or SA or SEA. It's possible if more orgs were in the scene. Our scene is a disaster, All the money is in a single tournament. Our Tier 2 scene is non existent and betting companies are taking over. We need to fix this issue. I look at Worlds and see the shiny sponsors their teams are showing and I feel bad about our game. If big sponsors like Audi, Mercedes-Benz, Beko, Bilibili, KIA etc can tap into a much younger market and make the LoL players it's ambassadors, One has to wonder why they aren't tapping into a market that actually has the buying power.
Edit: I didn't mean Betting sponsors doesn't make us a real sport, I meant that we need to stop relying on betting sponsors.
Hey folks,
I am working on a project called YouTube Star Rating with a friend of mine. The project aims to bring a star rating system to YouTube. It's a rating system that will never disappear on you (*khm* the dislike button *khm*). It works as a simple and free browser extension that adds stars under the videos on YouTube.
The difference between the rating systems is subtle, yet very important.
- Star rating - the user will associate it with quality. If the user sees a video rated with 5 stars, they will think that it is of very good quality.
- Like/dislike rating - the user will associate it with preference. If the user sees a video that received some "likes", they will think that some people prefer it, without necessarily associating it with quality.
We have just launched on Product Hunt and would be so glad if you guys were to try it out and send some feedback our way. https://www.producthunt.com/posts/youtube-star-rating
As soon as I receive my consistency email someone give me a shit rating , now I’m down to 4.7. I feel like I no longer receive notifications for order. How do is fix this?
First, I’m by no means a trained meteorologist. I’m just a weather nerd who took a skywarn class a few years ago, so this is coming from a completely amateur perspective. That said, I’d like to see y’all’s input on my thoughts regarding the way we rate tornados, more specifically the lack of any meaningful rating system while a tornado is in progress and the effects on public perception of a current tornado threat.
I was just watching the outstanding WPSD-6 coverage of the Quad State Tornado. The two meteorologists did a terrific job covering an extremely dangerous situation in spite of technical issues behind the scenes. Those guys undoubtably saved lives that night.
One major thing I noticed while watching the coverage is that the meteorologists - correctly - strayed away from saying “this is an EF-X tornado”. One of them did say something to that affect but was immediately but gently corrected by his colleague. We all know the reasoning behind this is that official ratings aren’t issued until days after the event because they have to survey the damage. The team used all the alternate language they could think of to stress the danger of the situation and again did a terrific job.
The general public, in my opinion, has a baseline understanding of the EF system. Meaning that an EF-1 is a weaker tornado that while dangerous, won’t cause catastrophic damage, while an EF-4 or 5 are deadly serious. I don’t believe however that the public understands that EF ratings are based on damage surveys instead of strictly wind speed and aren’t officially issued until after the fact.
In my opinion I think it could be useful for warnings and media coverage to say something like “this has the potential to cause EF-X” damage rather than stepping around that kind of language. My - again amateur - suggestion is that a preliminary rating, based on measured velocity, observed TDS, or other metric can be issued for a tornado on the ground, while the official rating is issued after a damage survey.
I understand that the NWS already has tornado emergency and PDS designations but I don’t think the public has a good understanding of these terms and they don’t really to my knowledge follow any standardized metric.
I’m genuinely interested in y’all’s opinions so feel free to tell me I’m wrong or offer any alternative, but at the end of the day the goal is to save lives by increasing public awareness of potentially deadly tornados.
I have been at a 5 star for the better part of a year, occasionally I’ll get an odd 4 here and there but it usually gets resolved fairly quickly. A few week later ago I had a 4 star that was gone over night. Now I’ve had two 4 stars that have lasted for what feels like well over 100 batches and my 5 star ratings have dropped every single day. In the past week I have lost 15 of my 5 stars. Right now I’ve got two 4 stars and some asshole gave me a 3 yesterday for “damaged blueberries”. I’ve talked to support and they told me to report fraud on every item that cooks up as damaged or missing. I’m at my lowest rating ever in almost two years at a 4.85, it sucks because I enjoy doing this and I bust my ass to go above and beyond. This rating system and complete app needs an overhaul, some sort of way for us to dispute ratings. Don’t have much to say just need my morning rant. And yes the blueberries were fresh, I shop for customers with more care than I shop for myself
We just bought a new house and are looking at a solar power system. The new house is about twice the square footage (~2470 sqft). I'm still a noob and doing research, and am trying to understand some of these numbers,
I'm getting confused on home solar systems and the power ratings. Looking at the power bill from our old house, it's saying daily average usage was around 12 kWh. The systems these companies are proposing, they say, are rated at about 7 kWh. What is with the difference between these numbers? Is that enough for daily usage, especially with a bigger house? Is that 5 kWh difference what would be used at night, when the solar isn't generating anything?
I'm going to keep this short because ain't nobody got time for long DD.
As you probably know, CLOV currently has a 3-star rating for its Medicare Advantage plans (both HMO and PPO). It's important to note that Clover is a two-headed horse, one competing in this space for plans, and the other the Clover Assistant, which has the capacity to transcend into every nook/cranny of the industry.
Anyways. Here's a snapshot of their star breakdown. they have (3) 1-star sub-ratings which are dragging down the overall ratings. The first I even have a problem with (Improving Bladder Control), but the other two (Coordination of members' health care services, and Ease of getting prescriptions filled when using the plan) are based on communication with vendors and customers.
https://preview.redd.it/6uxqnrkukjn71.jpg?width=1859&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=654c15b6088f754aa23f54bc99dc06f622d509df
https://preview.redd.it/nmaqyfdvkjn71.jpg?width=1797&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=df7d8beb6f5937ca4a697c58ee3832bd9453bd8f
It's been posted before but Clov leadership is looking for a Director, of Star program. Look at the highlighted bullet point - they want this person to directly address the problems noted above.
-
https://preview.redd.it/8nlfjadwkjn71.jpg?width=1183&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f690929d0db49207168c27135bcd172c2a730502
Open enrollment is Oct 15th for Medicare Advantage, and this will be the first year Clov is in the system in the counties it participates in. This presents optimism, of course. However, here's the bummer. CLOV is still so new in this space (some offerings didn't even have a star because the program was too new to rate), that addressing these problems before early October, when the star ratings come out, may not be feasible. I hope I'm wrong.
I went to NJ and looked at competition and you can see the others in this space. There are a plethora (Paco...do you know what a plethora is?) of 4-star and 3.5-star programs pushing down Clover from the old layperson's eyes. However, a little glimmer of hope, it does appear Clover is one of the best plans for the "lowest yearly drug deductible", as they showed up on the fr
... keep reading on reddit ➡Hey folks,
I am working on a project called YouTube Star Rating with a friend of mine. The project aims to bring a star rating system to YouTube. It's a rating system that will never disappear on you (*khm* the dislike button *khm*). It works as a simple and free browser extension that adds stars under the videos on YouTube. More info on https://youtubestarrating.com
The difference between the rating systems is subtle, yet very important.
- Star rating - the user will associate it with quality. If the user sees a video rated with 5 stars, they will think that it is of very good quality.
- Like/dislike rating - the user will associate it with preference. If the user sees a video that received some "likes", they will think that some people prefer it, without necessarily associating it with quality.
We have just launched on Product Hunt and would be so glad if you guys were to try it out and send some feedback our way. https://www.producthunt.com/posts/youtube-star-rating
