Ratings Report for KK281 - Alphabetical Order
All players with established ratings (10+ games against opponents with
established ratings) and current membership.
An initial rating was assigned to Roy Henock and Kenneth Ratcliff (congratulations!).
Anderson, Lawrence D. 1421
Austin, John H. 1670
Avena, Carlos 1846
Barry, Robert F. 2247
Barton, George P. 1502
Bates, Michael W. 2557
Belter, Ralph 2211
Benjamin, James M. 1278
Best, Herbert E. 1739
Borne, Lawrence 1683
Brotze, Robert J. 1598
Brown, Dean W. 1824
Brown, James R. 1571
Buschmann, Andrew 1693
Carter, Maurice 1842
Chabassol, Wade E. 1951
Chamberlin, Paul 1749
Chaney, Kenneth, M. 1503
Chranowski, Charles 1711
Clark, Scotter 1628
Clemons, Ricky 1836
Cofield, Luthor 1759
Conner, Charles 1621
Conti, Frank P. 1694
Cotten, Donald R. 2333
Covington, M. Paul 1806
Curran, Shane D. 1818
Daffin, Charles H. 1901
Daudish, Joseph 1560
Dawson, Jerry 1863
De Baene, Jean-Paul 2176
Dippel, Jim 1527
Donaghy, G. R. 1778
Dostal, Don J. 1660
Easley, Dan (Walter) 1904
Eisenberg, Robert 2163
Evans, Stanley 1795
Ezzell, Johnny 1358
Fadigan, Joseph 1553
Fawcett, John L. 1347
Floyd, Jesse 1754
Gibson, Jeffry R. 1459
Hansen, Christopher 2261
Harlin, Michael 1733
Hecht, Simon W. 2043
Henock, Roy 1704
Hernandez, Jesus 1758
Hernandez, Julian A. 1938
Hill, Beamon B. 2167
Hobson, Nathaniel D. 1645
Holmquist, Marson 1407
Houser, Ted 2507
Hrabovsky, Stephen J. 1616
Johnson, Duane D. 1632
Johnson, Lowell E. 1729
Kappel, Ray D. 1801
Kares, Danny 1636
Kay, Richard 1650
King, Z. L. 1859
Koehler, John J. 1482
Kohler, Dennis 1252
Kremen, Raymond 1985
Laing, Robert L. 2039
Lane, Riley 2177
Lawrence, Caesar 2241
Ledford, Steven Sr. 2346
Lemon, Gary S. 1132
Lewis, Walter J. 2211
Love, Geoffrey T. 1731
Luoma, Everett E. 1482
Lynch, Lawrence 1757
|
MacDonald, Robert A. 1405
Marshall, Michael J. 2180
Martin, George H. 1579
Mathews, Robert 1779
Mathiopoulos, Alex 1925
McDaniel, Curtis W. 2265
Mercer, Larry 1900
Miettinen, Kristo 2405
Miller, Patrick A. 1380
Modes, Daniel R. 1886
Moenich, Neal W. 1618
Moore, Bobby Jr. 2305
Mulford, Michael A. 2123
Myers, Matthew 1802
Ng, Willy C. 1905
Nolan, Dorothy 1624
O'Keefe, Michael J. 2215
Ovall, Larry 2056
Papowitz, Eugene 1651
Peter, George Jr. 1893
Plonas, Kerry 1910
Plowman, Roger E. 1520
Quirk, Michael P. 2258
Rodriguez, Juan 1937
Rosenheim, Harold 1298
Royer, Dale 1878
Russin, Ronald A. 1748
Sasseen, John 1604
Schoolcraft, Daniel R. 1790
Scott, Herman B. 1892
Sedlmayer, Walter 1612
Shearer, Robert E. 1809
Sikes, Haskel E. 2013
Singleton, Manuel M. 1806
Slater, Robert W. 1935
Slechta, David J. 1797
Smiley, William R. 1567
Spooner, Frank R. Sr. 1619
Staven, Martin 1359
Stephan, Walter F. 1783
Storr, William R. 1935
Strunk, Larry 1436
Terry, David R. 1555
Thomas, Gerald 2010
Vanderbeek, Charles 1758
Waddell, Thomas 1686
Waibel, Klaus 1933
Walker, John T. 1893
Warren, John G. 1957
Williams, Arthur 1960
Willis, Steven C. 1831
Wyatt, Norman W. 1683
|
|
All
players with provisional ratings (0-9 games against opponents
with established ratings) and current membership.
Basham, Derek 1500
Bautista, Eric 1450
Bruner, David 1750
Carter, Charles 1800
Franks, Jimmy 1500
Greb, Leland 1500
Hawks, Robby 1800
Headbird, Will 1600
Hunt, David 1200
Jaris, Jill 1500
Kessler, Michael M. 1200
Kha, Stephen 1400
MacDermid, B. W. 1400
Modina, Carlos 1900
Moore, David 2000
Noel, Thomas K. 1615
Ortega, Michael 1800
Ratcliff, Kenneth 2150
Rush, Larry 1900
Sanders, Keith 1200
Swicegood, Jim 1650
Ware, Michael 1500
Widener, William 1550
Greatest increases
(>20 points).
King, Z. L. 81
Curran, Shane D. 66
Brown, James R. 61
Royer, Dale 53
Chranowski, Charles 51
Anderson, Lawrence D. 38
Storr, William R. 37
Covington, M. Paul 28
Papowitz, Eugene 24
Russin, Ronald A. 22
Hobson, Nathaniel D. 20
This report is based on 188 current and 88 prior results, of which 172 were rated and 97 are held over into the next rating period.
*These
increases (and other enormous increases in previous reports) are
due to the assignment of an initial rating to a previously provisionally
rated player. When an initial rating is assigned, the provisional
rating is used only as the starting point of an algorithm that searches
for a rating consistent with the batch of established results. In
this consistency check, the original provisional rating is assigned
no weight, and therefore initial ratings can depart from provisional
ratings by arbitrarily large amounts, if a player’s results warrant
such a departure.
| Senior Master |
2400+ |
|
|
| Master |
2200-2399 |
|
|
| Expert |
2000-2199 |
|
|
| Class A |
1800-1999 |
|
|
| Class B |
1600-1799 |
|
|
| Class C |
1400-1599 |
|
|
| Class D |
1200-1399 |
|
|
| Class E |
0-1199 |
|
Overview
of the rating system
The rating system implemented for ASPCC is Arpad Elo’s
system with a fixed weight per game and logistic scoring expectation
function. For games played between players with established ratings,
this means essentially that the game is a wager for 32 rating points,
with each player contributing a portion of the 32 points to the “pot”
in proportion to their odds of winning (estimated from previous ratings).
The 32 points then go to the winner (minus the winner’s contribution
to the pot), while the loser loses their contribution to the pot. In
the event of a draw, each player gets 16 points, minus their contribution
to the pot. The contributions are taken out at the same time as the
game is rated, i.e. there is no “pay now, win later” delay in adjusting
ratings. The scoring expectation function and the contribution to the
32-point pot can be computed for each player form the following formula:
Expected score =
1/(1+exp[(his_rating-my_rating) /166.2])
Contribution = 32*expected score
The expression “exp” represents the exponentiation function, available
in Excel with that name, or on any scientific calculator with the key
labeled “ex”.
To take an example, suppose that player A has a rating of 1450, and
player B has a rating of 1320, and they play a game. What happens in
each of the three cases (win/lose/draw)?
First, nothing happens until the game ends. So, if the ratings of the
two players change during the course of the game because of other games
finishing, then it is the most recent ratings that count. In the case
of ASPCC games, all results published in any one issue of King’s Korner
are rated simultaneously, using as the “previous” rating the rating list
published in that same issue. For instance, the ratings list published
here in KK266 is based on the formulae above, applied to each game reported
by a TS in KK265, and using the ratings list in KK265 for the ratings
in the formulae (“his_rating” and “my_rating”).
So, to make the example concrete, let’s stipulate that the ratings for
player A and player B in the example were published in KK265, and so
was the result of their game, and neither player A nor player B had any
other results published in KK265.
Then, we can calculate the expected result of their
game: player A’s expected score is 0.686, while player B’s expected score
is 0.314. Each player contributes rating points to the wager in these
proportions, so player A contributes 22 points, while player B contributes
10 points (for a total of 32 points).
If Player A wins, he gains 32 minus 22 points, or 10 points, and has
a new rating of 1460, while player B loses 10 points and has a new rating
of 1310. On the other hand, if player B wins then he gains 32 minus
10 points, or 22 points, and has a new rating of 1342, while player A
loses 22 points and has a new rating of 1428.
If the game is drawn, then player A “gains” 16 minus 22 points, i.e.
he loses 6 points, and his new rating is 1444, while player B gains 16
minus 10 points, or 6 points, and has a new rating of 1326.
If, as it usually happens, a player has many results in the same issue
of King’s Korner, then the gains and losses are all computed based on
the previous ratings, and then all gains and losses are combined into
one for the rating change from one list to the next.
In situations where a player is provisionally rated, the rating adjustment
is handled differently. The games of provisionally rated players are
held in a storage file until they achieve 10 results against players
with established ratings. At that time, a pseudorating (for purposes
of the formulae only) is assigned based on their score in those 10 games
and the ratings of their opponents, and then those 10 games are rated
using the formulae above in the ordinary way.
Thus, the first rating published for a player is neither their provisional
rating assigned for tournament qualification purposes (which is never
used in the rating system), nor their pseudorating based on a self-consistency
calculation for their 10-game performance and their opponents’ ratings,
but rather it is the result of updating the pseudorating using the ordinary
ratings update formulae and the 10 (or more) games that have been held
for their initial rating. |