ELO calculation for joint placements.

[vigorousRoll]

Will there be the same amount of ELO given to all players in a team? I think there should (except of course factor for first x games will remain).

If I have an ELO of 300 and my partner has an ELO of 100, he should receive significantly more ELO points than me if we happen to beat, say, a team of two players whose ratings were 200 and 200.

[eoc]

If I have an ELO of 300 and my partner has an ELO of 100, he should receive significantly more ELO points than me if we happen to beat, say, a team of two players whose ratings were 200 and 200.

In that case, your partner will receive additional ELO points for tying with you, while you will lose points for tying with a lower-ranked player, which is what we're trying to get addressed next here Of course these ties aren't the only ELO modifications, so you might come out on top after losing a minor amount to your teammate(s) but gaining more from defeating your opponent(s). The change in place right now is that you can't end up in the negative after all such computations are combined for the end result.

Receiving different ELO points for defeating the "same" common opponents is another matter, at least as far as I'm concerned. But ELO computation between winning parties for anything considered a tie (e.g. team games, quitting tables) should not take place in an ideal ranking system.

[Silene]

If I have an ELO of 300 and my partner has an ELO of 100, he should receive significantly more ELO points than me if we happen to beat, say, a team of two players whose ratings were 200 and 200.

Why should he get more points? Did he contribute more to the win than you did?
That's just... wrong.

[eoc]

Why should he get more points? Did he contribute more to the win than you did?
That's just... wrong.

In the Elo system, the higher-ranked players have higher expected win probabilities against lower-ranked players. So no, they did not contribute more to the win, but they weren't expected to win at all as much as the higher-ranked player was. This results in a greater ELO point increase. For team-vs-team games on BGA, the same applies.

You're free to lobby for the change you're envisioning, but please open a new thread dedicated to that proposal, since right here we'd like to get placement ties properly implemented w/r/t ranking outcome, not re-compute team-vs-team ELO. Anything on top of that leads to confusion when folks read through the replies Thanks!

[diamant]

F and N are in team and win a doubles tennis match.

How about someone claiming that F and N were tied?

Do you think it would be legitimate to better reward the less classified of F and N?

[eoc]

Again, those two statements are separate issues. The first statement, claiming that there's a tie when really there is not and cannot be, is a real problem and you've correctly identified why it should not work like that. Right now, it does however on BGA!
The second statement, implying that somebody gets rewarded, is exactly correct: Over time, to find your true Elo rank, you must benefit more from winning against higher-ranked opponents. This works both ways and, while not obvious at first, actually is the fairer system than handing out an "average" to all players in the same team.

With that system, it would then become beneficial to grab yourself a few rookies, coach+carry them to a team victory, and reap a windfall of ELO points if you succeed – since they'll significantly boost your team's average Elo gain – while not losing that much of you don't. But yeah, let's continue that part of the conversation here: https://boardgamearena.com/forum/viewto ... =3&t=13760

[Silene]

You're free to lobby for the change you're envisioning, but please open a new thread dedicated to that proposal, since right here we'd like to get placement ties properly implemented w/r/t ranking outcome, not re-compute team-vs-team ELO. Anything on top of that leads to confusion when folks read through the replies Thanks!

Well, the thread-opener specifically referred to the case where joint placements arise because the affected players are in a team (referring to NotAlone and Werewolves). But ok I'll reply in the new thread.

[eoc]

Well, the thread-opener specifically referred to the case where joint placements arise because the affected players are in a team

Exactly. Again, since I'm not sure I can be any more clear, sorry if it sounds condescending at some point: Exactly. The issue being that ties cause ELO movement within the team. Going from the higher-ranked players in the team, to the lower-ranked players in the same team that all ended in the same place. And played on the same team. This is not about any other team's involvement, not even about winning or losing. Not about how much your rank should change because of your win, or your defeat. Just that it shouldn't simply because you played in the same team as good/bad/new players.