Another Rating System Much More Accurate Than the ITTF World Ranking

This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Jul 2017
1,763
836
2,919
Here you are.
This is the probability of upset function
.View attachment 15161
the difference is about only 250 points. With the difference about 400 points, the Upset chance is almost zero.

For Ma Long, has only 13000 points, and Ovtcharov has 16000 points. You can apply on the Distribution curve yourself, and apply the PDF function to find the winning chance.

ITTF ranking is a very bad design.
No loosing-point, so everybody can abuse the system. Mass play, and don't care about the loss, because you can only win the point, but never loose your points.

ERT, now I know you don't know what you are doing. The RC and USATT charts are designed for systems that range from about 0-3000 points. ERT is applying the same charts to the new 'scoring' or 'performance' system that is scaled much differently. The RC chart was never meant to be applied to the new ITTF tournament scoring/performance system.

Another item is how do you implement rating 4-3 wins better than 4-0 wins. I think this is a great idea but this is not simple probability math. I was told recently there are some math heavy hitters that visit this forum that can verify the results.

After reading about this topic I think the rating system like RC should be used in parallel with the new ITTF tournament scoring or performance system. They seem to fill two different purposes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NextLevel
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Active Member
Oct 2012
891
510
1,733
Read 1 reviews
Actually I think it is not too difficult to weigh 4-3, 4-2, 4-1, or 4-0 to address skill domination in RC system as long as we don;t need to look at how closely the score of each game is. It means 4-0 is a 4-0 whether it is 11-0,11-0, 11-0, 11-0 or 18-16, 18-16, 14-12, 14-12. There should be no difference in weighing scale even we know the 2nd set of data show the domination is a lot less. Otherwise we will run into mathematics mess.

As a suggestion (don't take my words too seriously :cool:) 4-0 will get 100%; 4-1, 75%, 4-2 50%, and 4-1 25%. So the winner will get point of winning plus the bonus points based on percentage. For example, in WTTC each winning game is worth 100 pts, then who ever wins will get 100 + 100x(% of bonus pts). Whoever loses will get some deduction accordingly. This is to encourage people play harder and more seriously.

Of course someone will have more question on this but what the hell... we are only making suggestions here and as someone already pointed out it took BWF 11 years to correct their rating system!
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Jul 2017
1,763
836
2,919
Actually I think it is not too difficult to weigh 4-3, 4-2, 4-1, or 4-0 to address skill domination in RC system as long as we don;t need to look at how closely the score of each game is. It means 4-0 is a 4-0 whether it is 11-0,11-0, 11-0, 11-0 or 18-16, 18-16, 14-12, 14-12. There should be no difference in weighing scale even we know the 2nd set of data show the domination is a lot less. Otherwise we will run into mathematics mess.

As a suggestion (don't take my words too seriously :cool:) 4-0 will get 100%; 4-1, 75%, 4-2 50%, and 4-1 25%. So the winner will get point of winning plus the bonus points based on percentage. For example, in WTTC each winning game is worth 100 pts, then who ever wins will get 100 + 100x(% of bonus pts). Whoever loses will get some deduction accordingly. This is to encourage people play harder and more seriously.
Your assumption is too simple. I bet 4-0 wins are much rarer that 4-1 wins. I would bet there is a bell curve to the relative weights would not be nice even percentages. BTW, wouldn't 4-1 be 80% for winning 80% of the games?
 
says Spin and more spin.
says Spin and more spin.
Well-Known Member
Super Moderator
Dec 2010
16,146
17,686
54,748
Read 11 reviews
jesus christ the net never seizes to amaze me. I suggest we make a new sport with boosting/speed glue allowed, super spin pips allowed,same color rubbers allowed and we can call it "PING IAMNOTINDENIAL PONG"

p.s. Once it seemed really funny that NL wanted me to post a video of me playing to verify whatever he wanted to verify but now I totally get it. Im suggesting that it is mandatory for everyone posting here that his age will be visible

This is hysterical. hahahaha. I think there are many reasons why people should show footage of them playing. :) But you have nailed it on one of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Suga D and TTFrenzy
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Jul 2017
1,763
836
2,919
Well ..it is not that hard. Someone with available/existing data on games with 4-0, 4-1,etc.. can easily come up with a distribution then adjust the percentage accordingly. 4-0 is harder that is why it is given 75%.... You are too serious!
Aren't the hard working TT players serious? Don't they want exact? While there is no such thing as exact when it comes to a rating system there are some ways of doing the math that are more exact than others.

One doesn't need data on games to figure this stuff out.

Tropical, your way would be an improvement even if it is not perfect. Too many times the quest for perfect is the enemy of the good enough or better. However, I can do the math. There just isn't an incentive to do so. If there was David Marcus probably would have done it by now.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Oct 2014
12,288
17,749
44,321
Read 17 reviews
Here you are.
This is the probability of upset function
.View attachment 15161
the difference is about only 250 points. With the difference about 400 points, the Upset chance is almost zero.

For Ma Long, has only 13000 points, and Ovtcharov has 16000 points. You can apply on the Distribution curve yourself, and apply the PDF function to find the winning chance.

ITTF ranking is a very bad design.
No loosing-point, so everybody can abuse the system. Mass play, and don't care about the loss, because you can only win the point, but never loose your points.

You are applying apples to oranges as zeio and brokenball have pointed out. But I think that is sufficient for most people who know enough about these things to understand why you likely don't understand these issues at all and are fudging them in some way.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Dec 2016
496
388
1,723
You are applying apples to oranges as zeio and brokenball have pointed out.
I understand what you meant with your questions now, I know this post is not directed to me but it shows the value of reading in more detail before jumping in.. You're right, of course.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Feb 2012
2,010
1,441
4,714
Read 1 reviews
I wish I was 35 ;)

care ful what u wish for now !

Anyway other than self promotion ERT's post does not offer anything special and it doesnt criticize constructively on why ITTF's rating is good or not. All of the "critics" choose to forget the incentives behind and miss the whole point.

The situation is pretty simple, the ratings will get balanced eventually and ITTF will apply the necessary adjustments/tweaks if things get out of hand.

So far the previous rating system allowed top players to get away and not participate, and that is degrading for the sport

people should complain about the quality of streamin/highlightswhich is terrible for so many years and is HD HQ on quarter finals and after . What was done with the ratings was just fine and essential if you ask me

I was almost joking about the age because, everyone declares to be an expert and self proclaim themselves as coaches or provide numbers that have nothing to do with reality and the big picture. And when they are faced with simple facts they dont answer or attack the forum user that provide these facts .

In the past years i almost quitted writing because there is no point to it, its better to play and coach/help my team mates instead of arguing pointlessly on the net with people that see ghosts or stick to their pov like it matters. trolololo...
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Sep 2013
7,260
6,230
15,301
Read 3 reviews
It was not the intention of my post to address the question on points system.


Now, you're comparing valencia and navel. Both are oranges, yet slightly different. The former for juice and the latter for pulp.


ATP has tweaked their points system multiple times. Started out with a lower ratio in the early 90s, then it got roughly 20% higher for a few years, with bonus points added for upsets, then it got slashed in the next few years again, and with bonus points taken away, then a further reduction for several years with the best-18 system, and yet another reduction for the past several years.


The ITTF have stated they will adjust it as feedback rolls in.


The bottom line is you're not giving it time to pan out. Cross your fingers it won't take them like the BWF to make an adjustment after 11 years.

ITTF is very good in making 1 adjustment per year
out of all the adjustment the past 10 or years, the result never got closed to it goals
waiting for them to fix (or denial) the ranking problems
So far ITTF has never admitted any mistakes the past 10-20 years

Btw, are you a fruit farmer?

Also, i'm sure these changes don't effect you as a human being
I have a good few engagement with coaches that had to plan 2018 schedule as these new changes come in a crucial year (not sure why they didn't do it in 2017 as it is less crucial) as 2018 has YOG and 2019 is your OG qualifications
I have seen lots of possible scenario and maybe for you, you can sit back to pan it out.
I'm with groups of people that can't afford to wait for it to pan it out.
I'm sure you would love to re-read my posts in 6 months time or 12 months time and see my suggestions in the other posts.
There are many flaws, and it is creating problems with management, especially for junior players

If ITTF knows they need to make changes, why didn't they pilot this for 1 to 2 years first?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: matzreenzi
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Sep 2013
7,260
6,230
15,301
Read 3 reviews
I think it is good for the sport to have two rating systems, the ITTF which records World Tour Recent Activity and this rating system which takes into account all major World tournament competitions. This rating system should be more accurate overall.

Well, the old system was that (ittf world tour standings - participation + ittf world ranking - rating)
now both are participation related so there is no more rating
 
Last edited:
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Sep 2013
7,260
6,230
15,301
Read 3 reviews
I was almost joking about the age because, everyone declares to be an expert and self proclaim themselves as coaches or provide numbers that have nothing to do with reality and the big picture. And when they are faced with simple facts they dont answer or attack the forum user that provide these facts .

In the past years i almost quitted writing because there is no point to it, its better to play and coach/help my team mates instead of arguing pointlessly on the net with people that see ghosts or stick to their pov like it matters. trolololo...

+1
I used to come to this forum every day
now I come maybe once or twice a week
recently was more, as it has been holidays but i'm sure I will come here less

this forum has become pointless in my personal life, adds no value or entertainment.
thats also why pros don't visit forums

what amazes me is that you have people that are on here for many hours a day.....how do these people have so much time?
 
  • Like
Reactions: tropical
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Feb 2012
2,010
1,441
4,714
Read 1 reviews
+1
I used to come to this forum every day
now I come maybe once or twice a week
recently was more, as it has been holidays but i'm sure I will come here less

this forum has become pointless in my personal life, adds no value or entertainment.
thats also why pros don't visit forums

what amazes me is that you have people that are on here for many hours a day.....how do these people have so much time?


Nah I just think they are on their cell phones so they appear to be all day here. The power of the internet lies on what we can achieve all together, as "romantic" as it may sounds if we did an internet poll and used the social media platforms to show ITTF that thousands of fans are dissatisfied with the video quality then maybe it will be worth the time to write in here. anyway
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Jun 2017
330
219
552
I just noticed something a little crazy with the ITTF Ranking List. Go and take a look. Scroll through the pages to see what it does as it goes into the lower players, especially into the players ranked say 700 in the world, or 800. Notice the ranking points become relatively meaningless. It makes me see that the points have nothing to do with skill and are only points awarded by ITTF for tournament participation with almost arbitrary value based on tournament finishing position, if anything at all. ITTF needs to switch to an ELO/Ratings Central/EmRat type system as soon as possible or this is going to cause weird problems.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Active Member
Oct 2012
891
510
1,733
Read 1 reviews
To know who has time and who not just look at the time they joined and # of posts they post. It amazes me!

Anyway, I do not think ERT's post is fruitless or pointless like someone here think. It actually can give us then ITTF something to think about and hopefully will apply the changes sooner than the snail pace the WBF did for its organization. I will keep my fingers crossed.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Jan 2017
120
176
423
ERT, now I know you don't know what you are doing. The RC and USATT charts are designed for systems that range from about 0-3000 points. ERT is applying the same charts to the new 'scoring' or 'performance' system that is scaled much differently. The RC chart was never meant to be applied to the new ITTF tournament scoring/performance system.

Another item is how do you implement rating 4-3 wins better than 4-0 wins. I think this is a great idea but this is not simple probability math. I was told recently there are some math heavy hitters that visit this forum that can verify the results.

After reading about this topic I think the rating system like RC should be used in parallel with the new ITTF tournament scoring or performance system. They seem to fill two different purposes.

No. This is the chart I show to explain the concept. I use my own code on my own Distribution curve to calculate the percentage. Read my article. I fit the curve and adjust the parameters, not the curve of RC.
 
Top