"raylopez99" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Apr 28, 2:17 am, "David Kane" wrote:
"raylopez99" wrote in message


Thanks David Kane. My speculation about what you thought was bogus
about the current Elo rating was then largely correct--seems like it's
the sample size being too small--for a moment I thought you had some
other special insight and/or were a crank. I still find ELO quite
useful when done in a normal distribution--play more games, and you
lower the error rate. Of course if you don't play often then you can
have an erroneous rating.

BTW here is the list of soccer (football) ELO ranked champions:
http://www.eloratings.net/world.html

RL

You will note that this rating system is a modified ELO system
that considers the score as well as the result.

In principle,a system that truly rated the moves wouldn't have
to use the result at all. For example, if a 1900 played like a 1700
but beat a 1300 playing like a 1500, then the winner would lose
points and the loser would gain them! Of course, some hybrid
such as that used in soccer could also have merit.