The new ELO-based ranking system

[gamerman01]

It’s good to know everyone has that capability so thanks.
Yeah I had to ask MrRoboto about it too - didn’t know what that box was

[oysteilo]

maybe it is explained somewhere, but there are so many pages…Now I have a question about this formula

What is RB? Is it RBold? If it is RBold then what happens if two players with the same rating meet? Well then EA =1

And putting EA = 1 here makes no sense for the winning person:

So I am doing something incorrect. Maybe the skilled people here can show their work (just like we did in school) with a couple of examples

[gamerman01]

I don’t know the formula yet, but 2 new players have exactly 1500 each.
With the current sensitivities, one goes up 55, the other goes down 55, if that helps.
MrRoboto is the formula guy

[Stucifer]

@oysteilo said in The new ELO-based ranking system:

maybe it is explained somewhere, but there are so many pages…Now I have a question about this formula

What is RB? Is it RBold? If it is RBold then what happens if two players with the same rating meet? Well then EA =1

R(B) is only used in context with R(A) to find the Expected Outcome (should A or B win). So yes it is R(B(old)) if you want to think of it that way.

And putting EA = 1 here makes no sense for the winning person:

EA = Expected outcome for Player A

If you have two players of equal rating, EA formula looks like this:

EA = 1 / { 1 + 10^[(RB - RAold)/F] }

RB - RAold = 0 since they are equal; formula then simplifies to:
EA = 1 / { 1 + 10^(0/F) }
10 ^ 0 = 1, so formula simplifies to:
EA = 1 / { 1 + 1 }
EA = 1/2

EA is always 1/2 for equal ratings, this conceptually is that they both have a 50% chance of winning.

EA will never equal 1, but it can get close to 1 if Player A is significantly higher rated than player B.

As an example, if A is rated 2250 and B is rated 750, and F is 500; we have:

EA = 1 / {1 + 10^[(750 - 2250)/F] }
EA = 1 / {1 + 10^[-1500/500] }
EA = 1 / {1 + 10^( -3) } = 1 / {1.001}
EA = .999 or 99.9% expected chance of Player A winning

[Stucifer]

@oysteilo For another example, our comparative overall ELO is:

Oysteilo - 1621 Player A
Stucifer - 1549 Player B

The expected outcome EA is:
1/ {1+10^[ (RB - RAold = 1549 - 1621 = -72) / 500] }

this piece 10^[ (RB - RAold = 1549 - 1621 = -72) / 500]
is 10^(-72/500) = 10^(-0.144) = 0.71779

EA = 1 / { 1 + 0.71779}

EA = .58214 or 58% expected chance Oysteilo wins, 42% Stucifer wins

[oysteilo]

@Stucifer Thank you! That explaines it. It is 10 exponetial. I read it as 10 multiplied with the fraction

very helpfull

[Stucifer]

@oysteilo I made the same mistake the first time I was reading the formula too. :D

[MrRoboto]

Interesting that two people made the same mistake, despite the term being quite clearly above the 10.

I just love that the last questions have been resolved so easily :D
I wish all challenges worked like that

[axis-dominion]

Fun to see this graph and read your narration of it, thanks for putting it together Roboto! yah i figured the few times where i was too addicted and needed to suddenly drop out for a while to regain balance in my life would take a toll on my record. I guess it didn’t seem as bad when at the time it was always resetting each year, but now with this new system it seems to matter more. Still debating if I’m ready to come back again!

@MrRoboto said in The new ELO-based ranking system:

And because it’s so much fun, some more data :-)

Who has played the most BM4 games? That would be our beloved @simon33 who unfortunately went AWOL a couple of weeks ago.

You can see clearly how he improved a lot, from his lowest point in March 2017 (1077 ELO) to his highest Rating in May 2019 (1693 ELO). Which is to be expected!

Now from then on his rating gradually declined - slowly but steady. Did he become worse? Maybe.

But remember, we are not measuring an absolute value. Your ELO rating is actually only a number that gives you a relation to the other players. So it’s not absolute, it’s relative to every other player.
I’d interpret this graph differently: I think over the past ~4 years his skill level plateaued or stagnated but A) more and more other people did improve while he did not and B) more and more new people joined the league who are on average better than him.

---

And now a completely different graph. The player with the 3rd most completed BM4-games, after @simon33 and @Giallo ?
Our very own @axis-dominion

Here is your graph, Mister:

A steady climb at the beginning where he chose mostly average players and won consistently almost all of those games.
The opponents were weaker than him, but still reasonably close so the games were still worth something. The climb could have been a lot faster had he won against the top players from the get go - but he didn’t! The matches against already strong Adam514 back then were almost all losses.

An unbelievable streak of 30 wins in 31 games between July 18 and March 19 (the only loss was against, of course, Adam514) rewarded him his all-time high of 2101.

3 losses on 16 Apr 2019 (probably mass forfeit?) saw him drop a whopping 158 points before his break.
A steady climb after his return brought him back to the top, although his rating seems to have plateaued around 2030

[axis-dominion]

You’re so on to me gamer!!!

btw bids are up in the 40 range for allies in that future, just fyi

@gamerman01 said in The new ELO-based ranking system:

@MrRoboto said in Proposal for a new, ELO-based, ranking system:

A steady climb after his return brought him back to the top, although his rating seems to have plateaued around 2030

@axis-dominion is so transcendent, he’s not just 1-2 moves ahead of you, he’s 6-7 years ahead of all of us.
During 2024-2030, he wholly devoted his life to increasing his A&A skills, playing 500 more games.
Word is, he just stepped out of his time machine and is about to share his extra knowledge with us poor slobs who plod on 1 day at a time. He’s only going to take the Axis, so it will finally, truly be…

---

a time of the Axis Dominion

---

[Soulblighter]

Is there a list of all the calculated ELO rankings?

[pacifiersboard]

@Soulblighter

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/24393/league-standings/2

[Martin]

Good morning,

I have a technical question: When I download the ELO table to my PC and open it in Excel, all players have an ELO of 1500. Is there anything I have to pay attention to in order to have the real ELO shown?

Thank you very much in advance for your help!

[gamerman01]

MrRoboto is probably the only one who can help you,
He’ll most likely see your post in this thread, but now that you know who you need, you could PM him if he doesn’t respond here soon

[MrRoboto]

Pretty sure the formulas in Excel are ever so slightly different from the formulas in Google sheets.

Gonna download it on my work computer tomorrow, since I don’t have an excel license on my personal one.

[MrRoboto]

Ok two major formulas didnt translate properly from google sheets to excel and it seemed to work after fixing both of them.

First, check the “Data” Sheet, column G

In Google Sheets, the formula is:
=IF(ISBLANK(F2),IF(EQ(F2,D2),E2,D2))

In Excel, I had to rewrite it slightly to:
=IF(ISBLANK(F2),IF(F2=D2),E2,D2))

And of course you have to extend the formula to the whole column.

I have the German Excel version and it failed to translate the formula in the (hidden) column B.

Google Sheets formula:
=IF(ISBlANK($A2),IFS($A2=“OOB”,1,$A2=“BM4”,2,$A2=“PtV”,3))

Wrong translated Excel formula:
=WENN(ISTLEER($A2),IFS($A2=“OOB”,1,$A2=“BM4”,2,$A2=“PtV”,3))

As you can see, it translated the “IF” and the “ISBLANK”, but not the “IFS”.
I suspect you don’t have that problem.

You might have other issues though. Just check the cells and see if they are doing what you’d expect them to.

[Martin]

Fantastic - thank you very much for your quick help! It now works for me in Excel as well. I replaced the formula in cell [G2] by =IF(F2=D2;E2;D2) and applied it to the whole column.

I also did some small adjustment in cell [B2] and applied it to the whole column B. If I remember correctly, there is a “@” added to formulas in the new Excel version, and it does not seem to work for me, so I just deleted the “@”

Thank you again!