| 1 |
what
does
"too
small
dataset"
mean
in
the
context
of
split
elo?
from
my
experience
a
relativly
small
number
of
games
is
enough
to
give
a
reasonable
estimate
of
someones
elo.
i
cannot
imagine
that
on
a
realistic
number
of
games
for
a
somewhat
active
player
the
split
system
would
be
incaccurate.
|
1 |
i
have
no
idea
how
this
scoring
system
works
but
common
sense
tells
me
that
just
mashing
all
values
together
(
in
one
way
or
another)
cant
actually
be
better
than
tracking
them
individually.
|
|
|
2 |
\n
|
|
|
3 |
what does "too small dataset" mean in the context of split elo? from my experience a relativly small number of games is enough to give a reasonable estimate of someones elo.
|
|
|
4 |
\n
|
|
|
5 |
a somewhat active player should have a reasonably large number of games of one or more type to give an accurate estimate for these types. in case there are gross misbalanced in the number of games some method of interpolation would probably be useful, otherwise not so much.
|
| 2 |
\n
|
6 |
\n
|
|
|
7 |
most peoples elo values hover 50-100, max 200 points around a fix value, but wether you have 1000 or 2000 games the changes per game will be the same. if you use one value for all types you still have the hovering, but probably more swingy. can you explain in regular people language how this is not a thing?
|
Predictiveness of the new ELO Split in 1v1-4v4