Is it True that if you beat the top guy in back to back games the NEW ELO system makes it harder to catch him?

[All7Pangaea]

Seems to me if you beat the top player back to back you get a penalty. What? Then how do you catch the top player if you get penalized for beating him more than once? Why are people more involved in manipulating the ELO system rather than just playing the game to win?

Is it also true that once you beat the top player 6 times you get zero ELO every time you beat him back to back after that?

hmmm, if so ... not an improvement ... but odd with so many games needing fixed we would be spending more time investing in worrying about rigging ELO than on improving the games themselves. Oh and improving the lag time, a much more important thing that needs improvement.

[MANNY-OLIVIA]

This ELO carry on is more confusing than ever.

Why can't it be as simple as e.g. 10 points for a win and minus 10 points for a loss?

ELO points shouldn't be calculated according to the number of games played, won and lost.

Experienced Players, are creating new accounts and shooting straight to the top because of the high ELO reward.

Where is the FAIRNESS AND TRANSPARENCY?

[All7Pangaea]

/\ /\ /\ Well said /\ /\ /\

One thing they did seem to fix finally which I had requested long ago is the partner ELO penalty. With the partner ELO penalty you cannot partner someone with a considerably low ELO without giving them 35 or so points before the game starts. No problem if you win, you just get 0 points, but if you lose you lose that 35 plus a lot more for the double loss. No problem, but in that instance then no point in playing with ELO which so many players badly want. And also no point in the old system in partnering a lower partner if everyone so badly wants the ELO. As it's not really about who's the best player but who can kick others out to gain ELO and cause them to lose ELO because of it.

[tcarlaw]

It is too bad that so many people are trying to manipulate the system and BGA seems to be trying to fix the hacks instead of improving the system. Spades has a high element of chance with incomplete information. ELO only works well in this case with a large number of games where the element of chance should be reduced by the law of averages. I would say that the biggest factor to improve the system would be to minimize that disparity in ELO at tables and discount unlikely results which are probably a result of the dealer or poor play from a lower ranked partner.

The way the system works once you have achieved a ranking you are happy with which is probably statistically unlikely, you should stop playing which means there are fewer players with higher ELO playing which makes it more difficult for people to catch up.

The idea of reducing points for the same partner was an attempt to make it difficult for people hacking the system by red-thumbing and always playing with their own dummy accounts to game the system. ELO decay seems to be counter productive. People play games to increase their ELO and then it gets disounted at the end of an arena season for not playing arena when the biggest reason people's ELO doesn't increase over time is being force to qualify for top leagues against lower ranked players.

I am suspicous of anyone who wins over 80% of their games in Spades. Unless BGA is pairing novice players against expert players I find it to be an unlikely occurrence. I think the idea of the rule is to penalize people who game the system by red-thumbing other playerrs, or use dummy accounts to cheat. Trying to create a system that doesn't favour people who play huge numbers of games when the ranking mechanism is inherently flawed and requires large samples is a problem. The large K factor for new players just makes the rankings more volatile and less reliable. Ideally BGA uses ELO to create groups of comparable ability and also uses the ELO to discount the penalty for higher ranked players so they aren't penalized for being social would be a good start. One easy solution might be to let people filter Arena games by ELO so you avoid the problem of different skill levels.

[silvertop]

I play because I enjoy the game.I am not bothered about Arena champion status ( though am amazed yet pleased that i actullay achieved that a few seasons back). Most of the previous thread goes above my head but do have to jump in on the last sentence about matching players with similar ELOs, in Arena. As I have said before ,ELO is just a "snapshot in time". 2 weeks back, my ELO was something like 270, currently it is 142.If it goes yet lower and this idea of matching ELOs was in force, then I (and others in a similar position) could end up playing with "newbies" or players who dont really understand the game, every time. In which case, I would get frustrated and lose interest.....and stop playing. With the system as it is, I can get good games and ,hopefully my ELO will be back in the high 200's again.It goes in cycles. With regard to the rest of the thread,I don't really understand how the ELO scoring works and, as I am not bothered about the Arena championships - have no opinion. But I do feel strongly that games should not be matched with
people with similar ELO scores.

[MANNY-OLIVIA]

When someone says they are not bothered about Arena, then why play in Arena and why play Partnered games majority of the time?

[MANNY-OLIVIA]

I've played Spades on here since it was developed.

You can't pull the wool over my eyes.


Spades has never been FAIR or TRANSPARENT.

All you get is Cheating, Red Thumbs, New Accounts or Accounts that have been Long Dead.

[ChiefPointThief]

The idea of reducing points for the same partner was an attempt to make it difficult for people hacking the system by red-thumbing and always playing with their own dummy accounts to game the system.

But you can still cheat the system. The change to stop cheating literally did nothing. All it is doing is taking elo from people who manage to beat the same person more than once in a row.

I am suspicous of anyone who wins over 80% of their games in Spades.

So basically you think that the top 7 accounts in elo are cheating?

2 weeks back, my ELO was something like 270, currently it is 142.I

You should've been around the last few times I wanted to play. You wouldn't be having this problem

[azcats2002]

i think it is wrong to assume that the top pairs are cheating. (although i wont discount that as a possibility)

Spades is a game of luck and and a lot of skill. if you have 2 players who know all the tricks and know when to set and bag they will dominate 2 people who rarely play with each other.

the only time i truly believe people are cheating is when you see someone do something that is successful but against complete logic.

i have seen people not trump on a partner's nil when the opps lead a 2 of diamonds on first lead... too me that is way too obvious of a cheat.

[tcarlaw]

I agree with most of what Silvertop has to say. ELO is so variable and depends so much on deals that I question the value of Arena as it is currently administered. I consider myself far from the best players, but even with a reasonable partner and generous deals I don't really see my winning percentage ever going much above 70% and I consider that unlikely. BGA does have an odd way of calculationg winning percentage as a victory in spades is calculated as two victories over the losing team. I've only played 2 seasons so I am subject to a lot of selection bias For me the biggest problem is once you achieve a certain ranking it is couterproductive to continue playing. I also see very good players struggling to play through bronze, gold etc... and in the process their elo ratings take huge hits which compounds the problem. BGA has tweaked the algorithm so you no longer are penalized for having a lower ranked partner which was common sense and recommended repeatedly in many different forums and games. I would be happy if it was possible to set up league and groups and generate statistics for them so players who are more invested could take more responsibility because this entire issue is a huge blackhole that just diverts resources from other developments. Personally I prefer to find a table of four players who are positive and have fun. I come to this site to relax not to criticize other players. As far as being critical of the top players winning percentage, the only way to get that high in the rankings is to have a good lucky streak with cards and partners so of course there is some bias there. The problem is the best strategy to protect that ranking is to just stop playiing which of course creates resentment.