betiko wrote:you must have a very impressive low score max after your christmas tilt!maxfaraday wrote:I'll support this suggestion if you put the lowest score as well.
yes, I think no one is against low score + medium/median score as well.
Funky, where else would you want it to be? the profile is where you can see all statistics from a player, and if you're facing someone and you want to see quickly this information, there is no place else that could be more convenient. high/median/low is part of the profile of a player.
macbone wrote:I love all the stats Gameknot puts on my page. It lists my rating (score), my percentile (a horrible 20%), games won, games lost, draws, and total games.
In addition, I have games in progress, my mini-tournament points, my team rating (how cool would a clan rating be?), my rating floor, timeouts, average time per move, longest winning streak, and longest losing streak (10 - ouch!)
I have my games won/lost/drawn/moves made broken down for all games, team games, playing as white, and playing as black.
Then, I have my ratings for the past 90 days, year, and all rated games: Average chess rating, highest chess rating, lowest chess rating, average opponent rating, highest rating won against, lowest rating lost against, and average moves per game, along with arrows that show if those stats are increasing or decreasing.
They're certainly incentive for improvement!
And then there's a pie chart for wins, losses, and draws, and a line graph that plots my own rating over the past year and my opponents' average rating.
Granted, my stats are pretty awful, but they're still nice to have. =)
betiko wrote:so basically what you're saying is that if you're facing a caporal; it's irrelevant information for you to know that this guy is a former brig or that caporal is actually his best rank ever?
chapcrap wrote:So, everyone likes this except Funky?
Funkyterrance wrote:chapcrap wrote:So, everyone likes this except Funky?
Everyone who bothered to post in this thread, yeah looks that way.
Although, this has sort of turned into a suggestion for lowest, highest and mean rank, the last of which I think may have some use.
Funkyterrance wrote:chapcrap wrote:I think the real point of this is to brag and remember good times...
Precisely why I've been more or less anti from the beginning.
Jdsizzleslice wrote:I think we should just stick with the Highest attained Rank/Score
Educated people handle ideas more complex than this all the time. We have a more complicated understanding of football than we do genetics and evolution. Nobody thinks just the quarterback wins the game.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests