Inaccurate Spar Ratings
 

In my opinion, both the single and guild spar ratings are terribly inaccurate. If I have 6500 points, and I win ten spars, I have about 6650. If I lose one spar, I end up with about 6400. 10-1 should not cause a net drop of 100 points.

On top of that, the ratings explain, "Your spar rating says how good you have sparred in the past few days." First of all, it should be well instead of good. Second, if I wake up Saturday with 6400 points, and I then spar pretty well all weekend and end up with 6850, it can't be right to lose 150 points in one spar, and another 100 in the next. All that hard work for nothing?

If anyone else checks their rating every once in a while, they could probably wonder the same thing. What I would like to know is why in the world do I have to win 50 consecutive spars to make up for a decent ratio the day before. Winning more than losing should not conclude in a net rating drop. Why are the ratings and top 50 so screwed up? Why are they so inaccurate? Does anyone else see this problem, or have some sort of fix for it?

Yes I've noticed and I find it ridiculous how much I drop from losing one spar, after I just finished winning 20 in a row.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system
http://forums.graalonline.com/forums...&postcount=872
http://forums.graalonline.com/forums...&postcount=874
Seems fair to me.

I'm familiar with the Elo system, I'm just a bit confused. If I beat someone with 2000 more points than me, I don't win more than 50 points. They lose 200. If I lose to that same person I just beat, why should I lose another 150 points, while they go up 100?

its pretty unfair, i dont think it was well suited for sparring with this many players

Yeah Shannon, I feed backed that it should be "well" months ago and it still hasn't changed. (I even explained why it should be well instead of good)

i dont like stretching it out so far (thats what she said), seems pointless. do the point gains/losses even scale?

This ELO does make sense, however it is extremely drastic when you lose. The loss of points should be reduced by at least 50%.

They need to fix ties before they fix anything.

Why should you get a loss but not a win when you tie with somebody? Makes absolutely no sense.

Bump.

Today I started sparring with 7063 points. I sparred 3 wins, and had 7183. I then sparred 3 losses and ended up with 6949. I began counting my wins and losses. 30 wins and 5 losses (in no particular order)? I end up with 6488. I'm pretty sure winning six times as much as losing is not worthy of dropping 500 points.

No, I don't spar new players with low scores. I spar anyone and everyone in the room. Something should be done, in my opinion.

So this is where Kenzo stole the post from lol.

THIS

This absolutely needs to be fixed. It would be awesome if they made it so it doesn't count as a win or loss and all the losses you gained from that on your record were subtracted if that's possible.

Not possible. Still, I'm bummed out about sparring all day and doing really well, but ending up terribly.After an hour or so or practice, I had 7206 points, won 3 times and still had 7206. But I lost twice to someone with a terrible connection, and there is no mercy. I ended up with 6710! Counted my record 14-3 after that, and I now have 6489!

Is this real? Are we supposed to judge people by this completely random number?

I don't know why people care so much about that spar ratio number thing. It doesn't prove anything since some people just boost or use other accounts to get to the top. Also, the math is whack on how it works so I personally think it's stupid.

Exactly. Either fix it, change it, or do away with it.

EDIT- Oh, but I can have 6700 and beat someone with 8400 (top of the list) and watch him drop to 8313. I bet if it was me, I would have gone from 8400 to 7600 in one spar.

O_o I'll stick with Glicko