I totally agree, but only for games like this. Hearts has always meant to be a attack the leader type of game, while other games aren't. I've played a lot of hearts and it has become increasingly apparent that players are playing to avoid 4th. There have even been times when you can basically call the game after two or three hands because second and third are just trying to get 4th out of the game and the leader doesn't have to do anything.
Also, because of the nature of the game, it's really one winner and three losers, so the ELO should reflect this. I would also suggest the ELO is awarded on the points difference average;
eg;
Leader wins with 42 points, second has 34, third 11 and fourth -2 - 42-34=8, 42-11=31, 42--2=44, 8+11+44=63, 63/3=21 - ELO for 2nd, 3rd & 4th would be based on a 21 point difference.
or Leader wins with 14, second has 6, third 0 and fourth -1, 14-6=8, 14-0=14, 14--1=15, 8+14+15=37, 37/3=12.33 - ELO for 2nd, 3rd & 4th would be based on a 12.33 point difference.
This would mean that players are more likely not to dump on last place as if they didn't win they might be doing themselves a mis-service.
Not sure how it could be implemented, but at the moment, Hearts is such a nasty place to play.
Also, because of the nature of the game, it's really one winner and three losers, so the ELO should reflect this. I would also suggest the ELO is awarded on the points difference average;
eg;
Leader wins with 42 points, second has 34, third 11 and fourth -2 - 42-34=8, 42-11=31, 42--2=44, 8+11+44=63, 63/3=21 - ELO for 2nd, 3rd & 4th would be based on a 21 point difference.
or Leader wins with 14, second has 6, third 0 and fourth -1, 14-6=8, 14-0=14, 14--1=15, 8+14+15=37, 37/3=12.33 - ELO for 2nd, 3rd & 4th would be based on a 12.33 point difference.
This would mean that players are more likely not to dump on last place as if they didn't win they might be doing themselves a mis-service.
Not sure how it could be implemented, but at the moment, Hearts is such a nasty place to play.