|
|
|
Author
| Message |
|---|
|
|
I am sorry, but you misunderstood me.
I am not claiming I had all the mathematical truth. I am claiming that is MY choice. You cannot change that.
I have nothing to correct you. And you should do what I said: let my equation for my personal choice, and start your own.
The topic is to choose the best player you think it is. That is my choice. If I support my choice with an equation you dont like, that is your problem. And still, my choice.
You choose your own best player and stop annoying me.
Nothing more to say.
Beco.
Edited: Actually I ha ve another thing to say about you calling me a lier (untrue?)
Correct. But it could be 1200 games (very strong player) or 1200000 games (very weak player).
|
There is nothing more clear than my way of choosing. It is not subjective. It is clear as the sun. The equation is there.
You take the first page of members.
You divide its points by twelve.
You take who got more.
If you are upset that this way you can get weaker players, you didn't understood (or agreed) with my choice. I didnt said I wanted stronger players at first, but the one in the first page who has more activity.
Anyway, the equation explain what I think is the best player. Not the contrary: what I think is the best is some formula.
If a very weak player can be in the first page (where I got the calculations) and had played 120000000 games, he would be my choice.
Maybe you are the one who prefer only the subjective choices like:
Oh... I like in this order:
1-ENDHER
2-Alsina
3-mds
4-shogun
5-gbsalvio
(no equations given).
This way, you would not claim that I am a lier. But because I explained my choices, I am a lier. Ok then.
Think less logical and more social next time.
|
|
|
Lying is saying things that you know to be false. I'm not accusing you of lying. I'm just trying to explain to you that your formula doesn't do what you think it does.
|
|
|
| I'm just trying to explain to you that your formula doesn't do what you think it does. |
My formula do exactly what I think it do.
What my formula dont do is what you think I am thinking it should do.
|
|
|
In my mind richerby has many things correct in his critic..But I just look at the beco formula and her results as a joke..Everyone can see that without any help that a player who has lost more than 300 games can not be the best!!..so simple..But I know that Endher is better player than those results say as he always play many games and some of them always to the top ranking players. With fewer games he could challance the ELO top. As the TOP ELO here shows that those 3 there are really the best ones.Vlad and Bergman play both fantastic and Shogun play also strong with special opening ideas.. I think that Lukius Casparow and Arb are in the same class. Myself is just lucky to stay at top 10 as I have not played much to players rankin on top 25.
Anyway it is fun to read the statistic from beco and everyone have theyr own ideas about the best players. Grand old Kirkland is also very good player with great career behind him in chess...
Best wishes to you all in this great server!
"Sharkie"
|
|
|
| But I just look at the beco formula and her results as a joke.. |
At least some sense of humor here! 
For those who think performance is the best criterion, I call attention to these players:
Handle Points (P) Total Played (T) Perf. (B%) Perf. & Activity (A%)
arb 58 58 100% 4.83%
Dogeval 39.5 40 98.75% 3.29%
Gambitshark 184.5 194 95.1% 15.36%
LoveChess 87 92 94.57% 7.24%
gbsalvio 200.5 215 93.26% 16.69%
They are the best performance players here! Congrats to them!
Cheers,
Beco.
PS. BTW, if we multiply the last two columns and order by that, we got:
Handle Points (P) Total Played (T) Perf. (B%) Perf. & Activity (A%) Multiplied (C)
gbsalvio 200.5 215 93.26% 16.69% 1556.5
Gambitshark 184.5 194 95.1% 15.36% 1460.7
LoveChess 87 92 94.57% 7.24% 684.7
arb 58 58 100% 4.83% 483
Dogeval 39.5 40 98.75% 3.29% 324.9
But if Gambitshark prefer, we can add the last two columns and then the order is:
Handle Points (P) Total Played (T) Perf. (B%) Perf. & Activity (A%) Sum (D)
Gambitshark 184.5 194 95.1% 15.36% 110.46
gbsalvio 200.5 215 93.26% 16.69% 109.95
arb 58 58 100% 4.83% 104.83
Dogeval 39.5 40 98.75% 3.29% 102.04
LoveChess 87 92 94.57% 7.24% 101.81
|
| Previous 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next |
|
|
|
