<< Back to Ladder Forum   Search

Posts 1 - 4 of 4   
Ranking: 1/29/2013 22:26:04

[WM] Artham 
Level 37

Guys, mayby some of you could explain it to me, couse I don't get it.

We've won about 20 of our last games in 2 v 2 ladder and our ranking went down in that time by about 40 points... How on earth is that possible?! What more can smbd do (other then winning games) to get the ranking up rather then down? Is that at all possible?
Ranking: 1/30/2013 00:03:00

Level 58

Warzone Creator
The purpose of ranking is to give you a rank. Its value is only relevant when compared to other team's rankings. It's only displayed to give you an idea of how far apart two teams are. Your ranking gives you #1, and a big lead over #2, so you really should be happy with it.

As for why it went down slightly, rankings are updated dynamically. A game that you're not in can still affect your rating. For example, HHH and Dunga lost their last three games and their rating has lowered a lot. And they beat you, so as they get worse it worsens the impact of your loss to them. It wasn't enough to cost you #1, nor even bring you close to #2, so you shouldn't worry about it :)
Ranking: 1/30/2013 02:02:33

Level 55
First, Unk/rib is the best team you've beaten and, with a few low 1900 teams, sets your upper limit based on skill. Since you also lost to unk/rib, the system thinks your skill level isn't much better, especially since you also lost to hhh/dung, the next highest ranked team you've played.

Second, the more games you play, the less guessing (inflation) involved in determining your rating. Beat more mid-level teams instead of top-level teams and the system will consolidate your rating around a lower number.

Third, all the wins don't matter much to the system. Relative strength of schedule is what matters. 2000 is expected to beat 1500-1800. You gain little for winning and get punished for losing. What matters most are games against teams rated 1900+. To have an upper bound near 2200 you need to play many teams rated 2000+. The 2v2 ladder isn't like the 1v1 ladder. Fewer teams above 2000 = less ratings inflation at the top. More low level teams + only 10 games needed to get a rating = more ratings inflation ranks 6-15. More teams but not enough top teams = lower upper bound.
Ranking: 1/30/2013 19:12:08

The Duke of Ben 
Level 55
Unless you have only wins on your record, you're probably not going to go any higher than you are now.

You would need to play against and beat teams with much higher rating than currently exist on the ladder, without losing more games. That likely requires a lot more teams to join the ladder, similar to how things were a few months back when multiple 2000+ teams were all competing. Also, the higher your rating, the more a loss will affect you while a win will not. You could win 100 games against 1500 rating teams and probably not even move your rating more than a few points. Lose one of those games though, and you'd drop far more than all the wins combined.

If you have zero losses, the system doesn't process the same way, and you aren't as limited by the lack of strong opponents. I don't know what numbers you could get with an all-win record, but 2300 is probably quite possible, and 2200 certainly is.
Posts 1 - 4 of 4