Do we have a new Laddar format?

Is it a replacement for the Infinite Tournament?

Yes but what will happen with finish infinite game records

I noticed it last night on a few variants of WYPS. Looked around elsewhere and couldn't find another game using it, so Richard must still be implementing it.

It is only new version of infinity tournament. Order in infinity tournament is used for new format of tournament. Some advantages:

• Is clear what happen with order after game
• new player is able to playimmediately in tournament - no waiting for a new round
• I add more stats and history to table
• There is no problem with number of players - when there is odd number of players, only 2-3 players, etc…

Some possibilities for future:

• Create tournaments with different time control
• Create tournaments with different game limits (more games at once)
• Turn-off automatic pairing and challenge players manually

I'm curious to see how this is going to pan out. At the very least it looks MUCH clearer than Infinite.

I'd keep auto-pairing intact - that's something valuable from Infinite that I think most players like. I'd rather see you implement a method that detects player inactivity to knock them out of the ladder.

It could also deactivate anyone with less than 3 points in 6 games, though I think you should have it send a PM to anyone who gets booted.

the positions in ranking are switching much faster now :)  and it is easier to kick down the permanent leader :)

Not sure how auto-pairing works now, but yes, please leave that in place. Looking forward to more stats.

Richard, but how does it work? Spend 5 minutes write the FAQ, a little effort will go a long way to help people understand.

There only very simple rules:

• Player can challenge max 1 player. If player has no challenge game, game is created automatically (with top available player) - if it is possible.
• Player can defence max 2 players. - Player could have 3 games at once
• Play with the same player after 14 days - when game is finished, new game between the same players is possible after 14 days
• Challenge up to CEIL(SQRT(order)) - for example player on 20th position can challenge players on 15.-19. position
• If challenger won game, overtake his opponent. If 20. player beat 16. player, he become 16., 16.->17., 17.->18., 18.->19.

I will add probably a new features, when all tournaments will start. 76 variants already started, but 42 variants play still in old format. Order in old format is used for a start of new format tournament. All variants will start this year - we will not wait for some kind's of games. For example there is one unfinished game from 2015, three games from 2018, etc..

New planed features and changes:

• Possibility for turn off auto pairing for player.
• Maybe is 14 days too long delay for short games.
• Allow play more challenge games for player. Instead of 1+2 games, play 2+3 games, 3+4 games etc.
• More interesting stats (change in position in last week, month, year), who was longest on 1st position etc..

Thanks Richard!

Richar, it seems a great improvement to me, probably because I love simple rules even in tournaments. :)

Regarding the new hex 15x15 board, it looks great, in fact it makes me wonder why 11x11 and 13x13 do not fill whole screen at all, but 15x15 and 19x19 do?Also what's point of keeping the other “Design schemes” that nobody uses anyway? As far as I know there are only 2 design schemes that are currently in use.

An interesting stats that you may consider is the “Borda count”. This is a voting method but it can be seen as an average of rankings. If you compute the average ranking over the last say 6 months then probably the random fluctuations ups and down will cancel out.

I use the go board scheme.

David, but why? anyway, you're unique! :)

I'm just holding the door open for the future wave of Go players incoming. Also it's cool.

David, well ok, but at least we should get rid of the ugly gray scheme. :D

I've to admit that the visualization that you're using is more sensible than I though because it preserves the correct distances between the cells.

Remember how much Twixt he plays, it's probably more familiar for him.

I've noticed on larger boards (anything bigger than ~200 spots), it's a little easier to visualize the intersections than the spaces.

metzgerism, I don't see much difference because anyway the intersections have to be a distance suitable for the placement of stones… it seems a purely aesthetic change to me.

So I've found a problem with the new ladder format.

When you resign a game, you immediately start the next ladder game that the system identifies you for.

It's a nice idea in principle, but in reality it feels more like the algorithm saying “hey, you already suck at this game…want to suck some more?”

Maybe a 30 minute delay would be nice.

I started to like the new format, in particular that it looks that we have some new players now (in wyps).

Still - it is not too clear to me how the challenges are assigned - I understand: max  within the ceil(sqrt(pos)) limit, but likely also matters when..

Eg in wyps.ld.w4en5 now two players from 12 and 13 place are challenging the player from 2.   One game ago the player from 2 was on position 7, so this is likely OK. Still - the guys from 12/13 can jump now from almost the bottom to the top in one go now if they win.

And when the challenges are generated? Pos 1,3,4,5 have no games assigned now… “Player can challenge” sounds like there is a “manual” challenge option intended - is there such one?

metzgerism, if you don't want to immediately start a new then simply don't resign? your problem is easy to solve…

I don't usually resign until I know the game is mathematically lost OR I'm in a lost position and no longer learning anything.

I'm losing a lot of Go, but I'm okay with that because I'm learning through the losses.

I'm also losing a lot of Catchup, but I can't learn anything from a mathematically lost position in that game. If I don't resign when the opponent has clinched their victory, I'm just being an asshole.

Where it's really tough is WYPS and DVONN, the loser nearly always MUST resign or pass their final few turns (in a lost position).

This ladder thing is interesting and a better option than the earlier infinity tournaments. I think it is. Have to say Richard did a great job with this! :)

But what will happen when all the players in the ladder will played 10+ games (or much more) and u can still see the column to the right getting bigger and bigger by the win andloss texts. Will this change as the number of games quickly increase (hopefully someone understands my question)?

a comment to metzgerism:

by the way- metzgerism, I do not know you but many players here seem to resign when they are in a position of losing as “few” pts as possible. Thats why i in general dislike when a player resigns (early in game). Probably you are not one of them but needed to address this issue. I understand if you, metzgerism, resign many games when you are out of position in winning and you do not care about points and in several of the available games this is acceptable. However, take in consideration the ratings change quick here so someone else will always “lose” or “gain” pts by a decision by someone to resign a game!

It is sad to see someone who notices the others player is going to lose five games within a few days so they resign in order to avoid the extra loss of pts themselves, giving the points “losses” to someone else.

cannonless

Hah! I don't have a good enough ELO score in any game to worry about keeping track of opponents that closely…I really only keep an eye on the tournament standings when I have a chance to win a big one, especially a Championship pool.

I've mentioned this elsewhere, but I kind of hate ELO - the zero-sum nature means that there's less incentive for high-ranked players to participate, and more for them to game their ranking to stay at the top of the list. I'd much prefer a system that gave a lot of credit for good wins, and didn't take away any points for losses - the only way to lose points is ranking decay. Hell, even some weird EXP/Leveling system would be more welcome than ELO.

Ultimately I think that's why I like how many tournaments there are here: it's not necessarily the most accurate way to rank players, but it gears most of the good players up and doesn't provide incentives for gaming the system, and the way Richard has implemented promotion/relegation, ELO is probably completely unnecessary.