Conquer Club

Posted: **Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:36 pm**

Blitzaholic wrote:Singles is so hard when you rank is over 3500. I mean just recently I played 3 singles games, 6 players per game, all super elite players, and most if not all had close to 2500 rankings plus, I won 1 and lost 2 and lost points. I mean I win 60 for a win and lose 32 and 33 for each loss? I win 1 of 3 games and lose 5 points, lol (rolls eyes) this has constantly happened to me over the months, which is why i play more teams. Now if my rank was 2500, i would play way more singles game, they are pretty fun when you got super players playing, but so hard to maintain a 50 percent win rate in singles, extremely difficult, almost impossible against super players and luck dice at times. congrats to al on the list above

Your point is well taken, but your math is a bit off...

Let's assume 5 players at 2500 points and you at 3500.
You would lose 28 points, and a win would yield you 70 points.
So winning 1 out of 3 would net you +14 points.

So to break-even you would need to win 2 out of every 7 or 28.6%.
Naturally, it would be impossible to maintain a 28% win ratio playing 6 player std esc games with excellent players, and if this was all you played it would gradually bring your score down.

But this is exactly how the scoring system is designed to work.... it's just like a tractor pull, where the sled offers progressively greater resistance as it is pulled.

Posted: **Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:40 pm**

I always knew I was the best player on here, the numbers don't lie.

Updated 4/25/07

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

....................... current score .............. current ............. highest .......
.......................... with NO...................... score................. score .......
........................ team games.................(5/25/07)............... ever .......

1. Georgerx7di. . 40,000,000. . . . . 40,000,000. . . . . . 40,000,000
2. Lazaruslong . . . .2634 . . . . . . . . . . . 2788 . . . . . . . . 2886
3. Jolly Roger . . . . .2542 . . . . . . . . . . .2542 . . . . . . . . 2542?
4. artur1 . . . . . . . . .2532. . . . . . . . . . . 2656 . . . . . . . . 2656
5. sully800 . . . . . . .2522 . . . . . . . . . . .2522 . . . . . . . . 2387
6. maniacmath. . . . .2458. . . . . . . . . . . 2789. . . . . . . . .3185
7. Nuke. . . . . . . . . . 2454. . . . . . . . . . . 2454 . . . . . . . . 3160
8. ZawBanjito. . . . . 2450 . . . . . . . . . . .2450. . . . . . . . .2558
9. Kid_A . . . . . . . . . 2410 . . . . . . . . . . .2573 . . . . . . . . 2573
10. Cyberdaniel . . . 2283 . . . . . . . . . . .2404 . . . . . . . . 3145
11. Goatboy . . . . . . 2176 . . . . . . . . . . .2258. . . . . . . . .2340

what is not displayed

1. Georgerx7di......80,000,000......

It's hard to calculate scores which is why you should not believe this.

where's the bunny, I need to paste the bunny.

Posted: **Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:44 pm**

Robinette wrote:So to break-even you would need to win 2 out of every 7 or 28.6%.
Naturally, it would be impossible to maintain a 28% win ratio playing 6 player std esc games with excellent players, and if this was all you played it would gradually bring your score down.

It wouldn't be impossible, you would just need to be that much better than the other excellent players of the site. However I don't think that's true for anyone at the top, so perhaps that was your point.

Also, my highest score ever should be 2552....you have an old one listed. (Which also means I would have been in 3rd place before my most recent loss...I had a good shot at winning that one too!

) Thanks for the updates of course!

Posted: **Wed Apr 25, 2007 11:40 pm**

sully800 wrote:...my highest score ever should be 2552....you have an old one listed. (Which also means I would have been in 3rd place before my most recent loss...I had a good shot at winning that one too! ) Thanks for the updates of course!

Sorry for the oversight.... it has been corrected

sully800 wrote:
Robinette wrote:...So to break-even you would need to win 2 out of every 7 or 28.6%.
Naturally, it would be impossible to maintain a 28% win ratio playing 6 player std esc games with excellent players, and if this was all you played it would gradually bring your score down.

It wouldn't be impossible, you would just need to be that much better than the other excellent players of the site. However I don't think that's true for anyone at the top, so perhaps that was your point.

Oh, very funny... so that's how you want to play... well ok, it's my turn :twisted:

sully800 stats for 6 player std esc games = 33 wins, 40 losses = 45% win ratio.
Well that is mighty impressive... but wait... what was that other little detail??? oh yeah... "with excellent players" ...

So narrow those games to those "with excellent players"... 6 player std esc games where at least 3 opponents are colonels
2 wins, 13 loses = 13% win ratio... mnnnn... you had better work on either your playing skills or your razzing skills...

hee hee

Posted: **Thu Apr 26, 2007 12:04 am**

lol! I wasn't trying to claim that I was better than the other excellent players. I was saying that someone theoretically could be....but since I don't think anyone is, I agree with your assessment that it wouldn't currently be possible to keep up such a high average as a player with 3500 points would need.

Posted: **Thu Apr 26, 2007 12:17 am**

sully800 wrote:lol! I wasn't trying to claim that I was better than the other excellent players. I was saying that someone theoretically could be....but since I don't think anyone is, I agree with your assessment that it wouldn't currently be possible to keep up such a high average as a player with 3500 points would need.

Oh.... I see.... um.... nevermind what i said then. :oops:

hee hee... gotta admit it though... it was a good one (wink)

Posted: **Thu Apr 26, 2007 12:02 pm**

Robinette wrote:
Blitzaholic wrote:
poo-maker wrote:I'm definitely on the list by now... If i count up my points will you put me up robin?

edit: I'm on 2466 at the moment, my team games now add up to +56. So can you put me on the score board at 2410 pls.

looks like you may have forgot poo

Please read the fine print

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.

Oh, thats the part where i don't qualify in. I've completed around 60 dubs games. wihch means my percentage of dubs games is roughly 25%. It feels like my name will evade this list forever :cry:

Posted: **Thu Apr 26, 2007 12:13 pm**

if in at 1993 and i mostly lose at team games, would that put me high up there? i read these posts but i have no real idea what kinda math is goin on here.

Posted: **Thu Apr 26, 2007 12:48 pm**

hwhrhett wrote:if in at 1993 and i mostly lose at team games, would that put me high up there? i read these posts but i have no real idea what kinda math is goin on here.

Clever clever... but that loop hole has been closed

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.

Robinette wrote: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.

Posted: **Thu Apr 26, 2007 3:01 pm**

robinette that avatar is hot.

Posted: **Fri Apr 27, 2007 5:21 pm**

Robinette wrote:
Blitzaholic wrote:Singles is so hard when you rank is over 3500. I mean just recently I played 3 singles games, 6 players per game, all super elite players, and most if not all had close to 2500 rankings plus, I won 1 and lost 2 and lost points. I mean I win 60 for a win and lose 32 and 33 for each loss? I win 1 of 3 games and lose 5 points, lol (rolls eyes) this has constantly happened to me over the months, which is why i play more teams. Now if my rank was 2500, i would play way more singles game, they are pretty fun when you got super players playing, but so hard to maintain a 50 percent win rate in singles, extremely difficult, almost impossible against super players and luck dice at times. congrats to al on the list above

Your point is well taken, but your math is a bit off...

Let's assume 5 players at 2500 points and you at 3500.
You would lose 28 points, and a win would yield you 70 points.
So winning 1 out of 3 would net you +14 points.

So to break-even you would need to win 2 out of every 7 or 28.6%.
Naturally, it would be impossible to maintain a 28% win ratio playing 6 player std esc games with excellent players, and if this was all you played it would gradually bring your score down.

But this is exactly how the scoring system is designed to work.... it's just like a tractor pull, where the sled offers progressively greater resistance as it is pulled.

well, some was at 2200 and perhaps 2050, anyways, I played 3 games, won about 60 points for one game aginst super players, and lost 33 and 32, lost 65 points, I win one game and lose 2 in 6 player standard, with all colonels plus and lost points, a 33% winning rate in singles and lose points, ugh :roll:

hovering around 70 percent win rate overall, so JR you can take that record of 64 percent off now you say you have!

Posted: **Fri Apr 27, 2007 6:07 pm**

2 outta 7 isn't really out of the question. I know when I was a general I had a 55 game span where I was winning about 2 out of every 5.

Posted: **Fri Apr 27, 2007 7:16 pm**

maniacmath17 wrote:2 outta 7 isn't really out of the question. I know when I was a general I had a 55 game span where I was winning about 2 out of every 5.

But was the 40% against really high quality players?

Posted: **Fri Apr 27, 2007 7:26 pm**

Georgerx7di wrote:I always knew I was the best player on here, the numbers don't lie.

Updated 4/25/07

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

....................... current score .............. current ............. highest .......
.......................... with NO...................... score................. score .......
........................ team games.................(5/25/07)............... ever .......

1. Georgerx7di. . 40,000,000. . . . . 40,000,000. . . . . . 40,000,000
2. Lazaruslong . . . .2634 . . . . . . . . . . . 2788 . . . . . . . . 2886
3. Jolly Roger . . . . .2542 . . . . . . . . . . .2542 . . . . . . . . 2542?
4. artur1 . . . . . . . . .2532. . . . . . . . . . . 2656 . . . . . . . . 2656
5. sully800 . . . . . . .2522 . . . . . . . . . . .2522 . . . . . . . . 2387
6. maniacmath. . . . .2458. . . . . . . . . . . 2789. . . . . . . . .3185
7. Nuke. . . . . . . . . . 2454. . . . . . . . . . . 2454 . . . . . . . . 3160
8. ZawBanjito. . . . . 2450 . . . . . . . . . . .2450. . . . . . . . .2558
9. Kid_A . . . . . . . . . 2410 . . . . . . . . . . .2573 . . . . . . . . 2573
10. Cyberdaniel . . . 2283 . . . . . . . . . . .2404 . . . . . . . . 3145
11. Goatboy . . . . . . 2176 . . . . . . . . . . .2258. . . . . . . . .2340

what is not displayed

1. Georgerx7di......80,000,000......

It's hard to calculate scores which is why you should not believe this.

where's the bunny, I need to paste the bunny.

I think you multiplied somewhere and not just added...if you do it again, im sure it will be more accurate :wink:

Posted: **Fri Apr 27, 2007 11:59 pm**

Robinette wrote:
maniacmath17 wrote:2 outta 7 isn't really out of the question. I know when I was a general I had a 55 game span where I was winning about 2 out of every 5.

But was the 40% against really high quality players?

well they were all colonels with a few majors sprinkled in so I would say so. Almost impossible to keep a streak like that going for very long though. Right now I'm right at 25% for my last 100 games against high quality opponents, which is a bit more reasonable.

Posted: **Sat Apr 28, 2007 3:59 pm**

In singles games, I've played 500 games, and my record is 650 wins, and negative 150 losses. For a win percentage of 130%

Posted: **Mon Apr 30, 2007 7:19 pm**

Robinette wrote:Updated 4/25/07

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

....................... current score .............. current ............. highest .......
.......................... with NO...................... score................. score .......
........................ team games.................(4/25/07)............... ever .......

1. Robinette. . . . . . 2727 . . . . . . . . . . . 2843 . . . . . . . . 3021
2. Lazaruslong . . . .2634 . . . . . . . . . . . 2788 . . . . . . . . 2886
3. Jolly Roger . . . . .2542 . . . . . . . . . . .2542 . . . . . . . . 2571
4. artur1 . . . . . . . . .2532. . . . . . . . . . . 2656 . . . . . . . . 2656
5. sully800 . . . . . . .2522 . . . . . . . . . . .2522 . . . . . . . . 2552
6. maniacmath. . . . .2458. . . . . . . . . . . 2789. . . . . . . . .3185
7. Nuke. . . . . . . . . . 2454. . . . . . . . . . . 2454 . . . . . . . . 3160
8. ZawBanjito. . . . . 2450 . . . . . . . . . . .2450. . . . . . . . .2558
9. Kid_A . . . . . . . . . 2410 . . . . . . . . . . .2573 . . . . . . . . 2573
10. Cellar . . . . . . . . 2350 . . . . . . . . . . .2468 . . . . . . . . 2468?
11. Cyberdaniel . . . 2283 . . . . . . . . . . .2404 . . . . . . . . 3145
12. Goatboy . . . . . . 2176 . . . . . . . . . . .2258. . . . . . . . .2340

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

So is this mathematical proof that I totally suck at team games?

Posted: **Mon Apr 30, 2007 8:00 pm**

Jolly Roger wrote:
So is this mathematical proof that I totally suck at team games?

lol... well there may be something to that... but who knows really?
Your team games account for only 6.7% of all games you've played, so people like us just don't have a whole lot of experience at team games. That's my excuse anyway... hee hee

I've only ever played 4 triples games myself, so who am I to talk....
but you have lost 8 out of 10 triples games that you've played, and 21 out of 27 doubles... (22% team wins)
so yes, you do indeed suck at teams! :lol:

Posted: **Wed May 02, 2007 11:35 am**

Good job, who has been doing all this

Posted: **Wed May 02, 2007 6:43 pm**

Just got up to 3235... gotta post this fast cause I think I'm about to lose a game as we speak, lol.

Never mind, false alarm.

Posted: **Wed May 02, 2007 7:00 pm**

maniacmath17 wrote:Just got up to 3235... gotta post this fast cause I think I'm about to lose a game as we speak, lol.

Never mind, false alarm.

did you get it or not :lol:

wrong spot anyways, this is singles rank only mm17, you are looking for CC's Top ALL-TIME Scores

JR is updating this and Robin is maintaining the singles ranks :wink:

Posted: **Wed May 02, 2007 7:02 pm**

maniacmath17 wrote:Just got up to 3235... gotta post this fast cause I think I'm about to lose a game as we speak, lol.

Never mind, false alarm.

It says 3235 MM17 :lol:

and ranked 3rd currently

no false alarm

Posted: **Wed May 02, 2007 7:20 pm**

lol the false alarm was for the game i was about to lose which I ended up staying alive in.

yea i probably shoulda posted this in the top 10 overall scores but robin keeps track of this on her standings too so it applies at both threads.

Posted: **Wed May 02, 2007 7:41 pm**

Hey robinette, congrats on making that list. I'm fairly new to conquerclub but I think I COULD be on the list too. I only played 5 or 6 team games and lost a total of 19 points on them. So my singles would be 19 points higher then it currently is right? So it would be 2282 + 19= 2301.
So did I make the list?
Thx in advance

[/b]

Posted: **Wed May 02, 2007 8:26 pm**

negoeien wrote:Hey robinette, congrats on making that list. I'm fairly new to conquerclub but I think I COULD be on the list too. I only played 5 or 6 team games and lost a total of 19 points on them. So my singles would be 19 points higher then it currently is right? So it would be 2282 + 19= 2301.
So did I make the list?
Thx in advance

Forget about the team games if you score is negative for them. She is no longer adding points for the negative team score, so your singles score would be exactly the same as your current score (the same is true for myself and NUKE). Anyway, you should make it onto the bottom side of the current list. Congrats!

This would be another good reason to have seperated scoreboards for team/singles. There are so many good players on the site now adays I can't sort through the hundreds of so-so colonels and majors and find that people that are actually good at singles.

Conquer Club

Top 10 Highest Scores (without Team points)

I'm number 1

robinette's avatar

Re: I'm number 1

win/loss