| Angelo De Pa1ma 2005-04-11, 5:59 pm |
| Ahhh, I get it now.
Performance rating doesn't enter this calculation in any shape, manner, or
form. Since the expectation curve is not linear you can't get an expectation
for the event by averaging the ratings, then looking up the expectation for
that "game". Instead, you must calculate the expectations individually.
E.g. sin 0 is 0 and sin 90 is 1, but sin 45 is not 1/2.
Now my question is, what is the philosophic/mathematical basis for *not*
normalizing average opponent ratings during a tournament as in my fantasy
formula? Just curious.
Thanks, Mike.
Angelo
"Mike Nolan" <nolan@gw.tssi.com> wrote in message
news:d2ru0v$17v$1@gw.tssi.com...
quote:
> "Angelo De Pa1ma" <adpspammersgotohell@tellurian.net> writes:
>
>
> Do you understand that 'expected performance' is a non-linear function
> while 'performance rating' is linear?
>
> Here's a table of the expected performance of an 1800 player against
> those other players:
>
> 1800 0.5
> 1900 0.359935
> 2000 0.240253
> 2100 0.15098
> 2200 0.090909
>
> In 5 rounds against a 2000 player, the 1800 player would have a
> cumulative expected performance of 1.201265.
>
> Against the field you gave, the expected performance would be 1.342077.
>
> Therefore, the same score would generate a higher post-event rating for
> the player who played the 2000 player 5 times than for the one who played
> the mixed field. (However, playing the same person more than twice
> makes you ineligible for the bonus formula.)
> --
> Mike Nolan
|