Top 10 Highest Scores (without Team points)

[Robinette]

Updated 5/5/07

I now present to you...
Top 10 Highest Singles Players Scores
(without team points)



....................... current score .............. current ............. highest .......
.......................... with NO...................... score................. score .......
........................ team games.................(5/5/07)................ ever .......

1. Robinette. . . . . . 2847 . . . . . . . . . . . 2963 . . . . . . . . 3021
2. maniacmath. . . . 2758. . . . . . . . . . . 3089. . . . . . . . .3406
3. Lazaruslong . . . .2571 . . . . . . . . . . .2725 . . . . . . . . 2886
4. Kid_A . . . . . . . . .2545 . . . . . . . . . . . 2693 . . . . . . . . 2573
5. sully800 . . . . . . .2501 . . . . . . . . . . .2501 . . . . . . . . 2552

6. Jolly Roger . . . . .2479 . . . . . . . . . . .2479 . . . . . . . . 2571
7. ZawBanjito. . . . . 2416 . . . . . . . . . . .2416. . . . . . . . .2558
8. artur1 . . . . . . . . .2385. . . . . . . . . . . 2509 . . . . . . . . 2656
9. Nuke. . . . . . . . . . 2357. . . . . . . . . . . 2357 . . . . . . . . 3160
10. Goatboy . . . . . . 2298 . . . . . . . . . . .2408. . . . . . . . .2408


11. Cellar . . . . . . . . 2273 . . . . . . . . . . .2391 . . . . . . . . 2468
12. negoeien . . . . . .2245 . . . . . . . . . . .2245 . . . . . . . . 2282
13. Cyberdaniel . . . 2187 . . . . . . . . . . .2308 . . . . . . . . 3145



Scores have been REDUCED to remove any Positive effect from team games

[maniacmath17]

Are we really going to keep subtracting 300+ from my rating? Most of those team games were so long ago that they don't even have any influence on my score.

Think about it this way. My last team game was 86 games ago. And from those 86 singles games, which have all been singles with mostly colonels and a few majors, my rating went from about 2700 to about 3100.

Now if we recalculated all those games with an initial rating of 2400 (which would have been my rating without team games at the time), after 86 games, my rating would be at least around 3000, since I'd be winning more points per game and losing less with a lower rating.

So in conclusion, even though I did technically win 300+ points from teams, my rating would be about the same with or without these team games since I would have been winning more points and losing less had I not had that inflated score.

[alex_white101]

yeah but then youll overtake robinette......but its her thread so im not sure thats gonna happen......

[Robinette]

Are we really going to keep subtracting 300+ from my rating? Most of those team games were so long ago that they don't even have any influence on my score.

Gee wiz, applying that logic it is clear that the singles wins in your 1st hundred games has actually pulled down your current score as well...

Think about it this way. Now if we recalculated all those games with an initial lower rating (which would have been lower without those singles wins at the time), after 100 games, your rating would be at least around 3500, since you'd be winning more points per game and losing less with a lower rating.

Are you starting to see the problem with your logic here? And even if we were to use one of these http://www.csm.ornl.gov/ssi-expo/or5.jpg to accuratly modify your score, wouldn't we need to do that for everybody? So until Lack decides to have a split scoreboard, you'll just have to live with it. In fact... never before has a saying from wicked been more appropriate that this one right now:

suck it up, cupcake

JUST KIDDING!

Obviously this is not the perfect way to calculate these scores, but it is the best we can do with what we have to work with. There are many who continue to have their fingers crossed that Lack will improve the situation with regards to score calculations in the coming update. I am one of those people.

[maniacmath17]

Gee wiz, applying that logic it is clear that the singles wins in your 1st hundred games has actually pulled down your current score as well...

lol. Thats exactly what I'm trying to explain isn't the case. My first hundred games have almost no effect on my current rating. I don't know how else to explain this to you.

And I don't know how you would think that a lower initial rating could result in a recalculated score of 3500. Every point earned does impact your score in the sense that by simply removing points and then recalculating, the new score would never be as high as the original, but over time it would approach that same number.

Yes the system isn't perfect and it is impossible to recalculate everyone's scores, but if you're really trying to say that the very first game someone's played has the same effect on their rating as their most recent game, then the margin for error in that is incredibly high.

I'm not trying to be a whiner, I was just trying to bring up some discussion about how to better these calculations. But if thats all you think im doing then by all means ignore everything I just said.

[Robinette]

Updated 5/5/07

I now present to you...
Top 10 Highest Singles Players Scores
(without team points)



....................... current score .............. current ............. highest .......
.......................... with NO...................... score................. score .......
........................ team games.................(5/5/07)................ ever .......

1. Robinette. . . . . . 2847 . . . . . . . . . . . 2963 . . . . . . . . 3021
2. maniacmath. . . . 2758. . . . . . . . . . . 3089. . . . . . . . .3406 <--record
3. Lazaruslong . . . .2571 . . . . . . . . . . .2725 . . . . . . . . 2886
4. Kid_A . . . . . . . . .2545 . . . . . . . . . . . 2693 . . . . . . . . 2573
5. sully800 . . . . . . .2501 . . . . . . . . . . .2501 . . . . . . . . 2552

6. Jolly Roger . . . . .2479 . . . . . . . . . . .2479 . . . . . . . . 2571
7. ZawBanjito. . . . . 2416 . . . . . . . . . . .2416. . . . . . . . .2558
8. artur1 . . . . . . . . .2385. . . . . . . . . . . 2509 . . . . . . . . 2656
9. Nuke. . . . . . . . . . 2357. . . . . . . . . . . 2357 . . . . . . . . 3160
10. Goatboy . . . . . . 2298 . . . . . . . . . . .2408. . . . . . . . .2408


11. Cellar . . . . . . . . 2273 . . . . . . . . . . .2391 . . . . . . . . 2468
12. negoeien . . . . . .2245 . . . . . . . . . . .2245 . . . . . . . . 2282
13. Cyberdaniel . . . 2187 . . . . . . . . . . .2308 . . . . . . . . 3145



Scores have been REDUCED to remove any Positive effect from team games

[Robinette]

sorry manaic... no offense intended...

I do agree that this is skued, and it effects you the most as you have 77 team games resulting in a 331 point gain... and yes, your team games are old, with the median date started being Oct 9.

I am all for an accurate list, and when i re-read this entire thread I see where this has been discussed, with the hope of seperate scoreboards from lack.... but don't hold your breath.

So we are both handicapped, and if you were to simply start and lose 215 points in team games then our handicaps would be equal. Or perhaps we could meet in the middle... I could play some team games and win 112 points, allowing you to only have to lose 112 for our "handicap" to be the same. I'm kidding of course...

So is it possible to write a greasemonkey script to do what CC won't do?
THAT would be the ultimate fix.

[poo-maker]

I re-added my team scores, i have now lost 226 points because of team games

[steve monkey]

I've only played 22 team games out of 889.
In triples games I've lost 41 pts and won 42
In doubles games I've lost 231 pts and won 149.

My current score is 2537.

Does this get me into the top 10?

[Genghis Khan CA]

I re-added my team scores, i have now lost 226 points because of team games

poo - wanna join one of my doubles games?

Go check the callouts forum, I'm not kidding

[AndrewO]

Out of interest, where did I disappear to?

I was quite proud when I saw myself at number 11 on the first list!

[negoeien]

2359
current score, I'm in the top 10 now. Yes!!!

[steve monkey]

now at 2552 points - edging closer?

[RL_Orange]

Hi all,

What about this one? Hehe, just reach 3168 points and just in only 19 days weeks coming from 1613. Probably luck.

[poo-maker]

Hi all,

What about this one? Hehe, just reach 3168 points and just in only 19 days weeks coming from 1613. Probably luck.

'
WOW!!!

[RobinJ]

Hi all,

What about this one? Hehe, just reach 3168 points and just in only 19 days weeks coming from 1613. Probably luck.

Yeh I noticed suddenly yesterday that you were in amongst the Generals and I hadn't seen you anywhere near them for a while. Best of it is, of course, the number of singles games you play. Scoreboard is already a lot fairer without the n00bs not being allowed to join team games.

[Robinette]

Out of interest, where did I disappear to?

I was quite proud when I saw myself at number 11 on the first list!

The 1st problem to be addressed was the accuracy of removing team scores. As pointed out earlier in this thread, the higher the ratio of team games the higher the scoring error can be. The solution to this 1st problem is to limit this list to players who focus on singles games, using 88% minimum single games... or no more than 12% being team games.

Sorry... although you are close with 14.6% team games (102 games).
But when you get there, I am certain to lower it to 10% just to annoy you... hee hee

[Robinette]

Hi all,

What about this one? Hehe, just reach 3168 points and just in only 19 days weeks coming from 1613. Probably luck.

That is CRAZY!!!
I'm not sure what is MORE crazy... THE RISE or THE FALL!

You definetly puts you back on this list... but can you tell me how many points you GAINED and how many points you LOST in the 23 triples you played recently (329151-329185) It was 17 wins of the 23, but i don't have the time to figure the points, and we need to do this to post an accurate #. thx

[Robinette]

reposted

[nietzsche]

May I ask, Robinette

How did you calculate the scores?

I mean... do you have an script or something, or you just do it one by one?

[poo-maker]

May I ask, Robinette

How did you calculate the scores?

I mean... do you have an script or something, or you just do it one by one?

People counted their own scores, and robinette deducted what she thought was a "fair" representation of their team games.

isnt it a little strange that maniac "has" to have 300 points taken off his score

[Robinette]

I mistakenly overwrote the May 13 info when updating this list...

Updated 5/22/07

I now present to you...
Top 10 Highest Singles Players Scores
(without team points)



....................... current score .............. current ............. highest .......
.......................... with NO...................... score................. score .......
........................ team games................(5/22/07)............... ever .......

1. RL_Orange . . . . 2809 . . . . . . . . . . . 2809. . . . . . . . .3168
2. maniacmath. . . . 2678. . . . . . . . . . . .3009. . . . . . . . .3406 <--record
3. Robinette. . . . . . 2627 . . . . . . . . . . . 2758 . . . . . . . . 3021
4. Lazaruslong . . . .2611 . . . . . . . . . . . 2765 . . . . . . . . 3149
5. Nuke. . . . . . . . . . 2563. . . . . . . . . . . 2563 . . . . . . . . 3160

6. artur1 . . . . . . . . .2533. . . . . . . . . . . 2657 . . . . . . . . 2656
7. steve monkey . . .2464 . . . . . . . . . . .2464 . . . . . . . . 2552
8. ZawBanjito. . . . . 2451 . . . . . . . . . . .2451. . . . . . . . .2558
9. sully800 . . . . . . .2353 . . . . . . . . . . .2353 . . . . . . . . 2552
10. negoeien . . . . . 2327 . . . . . . . . . . .2327 . . . . . . . . 2385


And these have been in the top 10, but have currently slipped out:

11. Cellar . . . . . . . . 2313 . . . . . . . . . . .2431 . . . . . . . . 2468
12. Goatboy . . . . . . 2296 . . . . . . . . . . .2406. . . . . . . . .2408
13. Kid_A . . . . . . . . 2215 . . . . . . . . . . .2406 . . . . . . . . 2573
14. Cyberdaniel . . . 2058 . . . . . . . . . . .2179 . . . . . . . . 3145



Scores have been REDUCED to remove any Positive effect from team games and Battle Royale games

[RL_Orange]

Hi all,

What about this one? Hehe, just reach 3168 points and just in only 19 days weeks coming from 1613. Probably luck.

That is CRAZY!!!
I'm not sure what is MORE crazy... THE RISE or THE FALL!

You definetly puts you back on this list... but can you tell me how many points you GAINED and how many points you LOST in the 23 triples you played recently (32) It was 17 wins of the 23, but i don't have the time to figure the points, and we need to do this to post an accurate #. thx

Since the lowest score i didnt play any team games. But if you want i can check those games for you. Had some help in those team games of blitz. Not sure if it helped though, lmao....................just kidding.

[Robinette]

People counted their own scores, and robinette deducted what she thought was a "fair" representation of their team games.

isnt it a little strange that maniac "has" to have 300 points taken off his score

Actually, once someone counted thier own score, it was then verified and if correct they were added to the list. As far as manaic's score, it was spelled out quite clearly in the fine print... and to make it easy for you, I'll post it again:

Many problems exisit in trying to create an accurate list of singles only scores with the current scoring system.
In an effort to create a fair representation, without encouraging anyone to manipulate any scoring system, this list has been revamped with 2 changes from the original version....

The 1st problem to be addressed was the accuracy of removing team scores. As pointed out earlier in this thread, the higher the ratio of team games the higher the scoring error can be. The solution to this 1st problem is to limit this list to players who focus on singles games, using 88% minimum single games... or no more than 12% being team games.

The 2nd problem was the method of adjusting the score when someone had poor team scores. As pointed out in this thread, intentional team losses would be calculated as point gains in your singles score. The solution to this 2nd problem is to limit the point adjustment to a zero gain effect for the singles score.

Obviously this is not the perfect way to calculate these scores, but it is the best we can do with what we have to work with. There are many who continue to have their fingers crossed that Lack will improve the situation with regards to score calculations in the coming update. I am one of those people.

Scores have been REDUCED to remove any Positive effect from team games

[poo-maker]

Ok robin, point proven...

I've stopped playing dubs, and i hope that my score will fix itself soon.

One day, i hope to make that list