Project ELO (Dataset released)

MagnaofIllusion · Post Post #70 (isolation #0) » Thu Jan 19, 2017 7:01 am

In post 69, Realeo wrote:288 players are eligible.
1852 players are not eligible due to "min.5 games rule"

Until more people are eligible than not posting "Top 25" lists is highly skewed. Not sure if the effort of going through enough games is worth it to you.

MagnaofIllusion · Post Post #75 (isolation #1) » Thu Jan 19, 2017 11:39 am

In post 74, mhsmith0 wrote:I'm guessing it's a curiosity thing mainly, which is more or less how I treated it.

Well I agree but even as a curiosity there are huge swaths of players who are not currently on the board simply because they don't play any significant number of Newbie or Normal games. So even as a curisoity it falls flat IMO.

Interesting exercise but really needs a massive number of people doing the data compiling.

MagnaofIllusion · Post Post #84 (isolation #2) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 4:01 am

In post 77, Realeo wrote:I disagree.

Top 25 is top 8%.

Top 8% is quite impressive.

Feel free to disagree but throwing stats that aren't meaningful isn't very helpful.

Your 25 players listed may not even be in the real Top 100 of all players. Or Top 200. or Top 500. There is no way to know given the small sample size you are using. As I said until you get at least half the player-base included in your pool of eligible players then your Top is just listing of the best ranked players in a small strata of the site's games.

I mean I understand the fun in doing it for you.

MagnaofIllusion · Post Post #88 (isolation #3) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 5:35 am

In post 86, Realeo wrote:There are 90 games yet to analyze~a combined players list of at least 1 000 players.

We haven't consider Open Games.

We won't consider Theme Games.

So you aren't going to consider what in all likelyhood amounts to a majority of the games on site?

Well thanks for the clarity on that.