System |
Pros |
Cons |
Comments |
Elo |
- Accounts for the difficulty of opponents.
- Doing well at a tournament with great players (who have high
Elo's) will boost a player's Elo higher than playing well in a
tournament with lesser skilled players.
- Elo is used in other contests and is familar to many people.
- Places more weight on recent events.
|
- Doesn't decay with
age. If a person doesn't play for a protracted length of time,
their Elo remains the same.
- Doesn't remove luck factor.
- Different stengths of player pools can adversely effect Elo.
An extreme example is this
story
of Claude Bloodgood.
|
- Should be
restricted to live tournaments only
|
Giants List |
- Has been in existence since 1993
|
- Only done every 2 years
- Popularity contest
-
Votes are not weighted by the
attendance of the voters.
If a voter attended only one tournament their vote is
weighted the same as someone who attended 10 tournaments.
-
No matter how many
tournaments a voter plays in, their purview of worldwide
backgammon players is very limited.
|
Opinions of Ken Larsen:
- (November 23, 2017) On the home page of their website, the
Flint Michigan club asks
"Who are the best backgammon players in the World?" and then
links to the Giants list. To me, that answers the question
about what the Giants list is all about. People who are
promoters of backgammon ... or instructors ... shouldn't be on
the list unless they merit inclusion by skill (tournament wins
or long time PR achievement). Golf analogy:
Butch Harmon (consenus # 1 instructor) shouldn't be listed in
the World Rankings. [He isn't.] Golf world rankings is all about
performance in major tournaments over the most recent two years.
- (November 24, 2017) To correct the "limited purview" issue,
I recommend that Giant List voters consider voting for the top players
based on a combination of the player's PR as documented on the BMAB
and the player's major tournament achievements during the most
recent two years. For example, I recommend that Giant List
voters exclude anyone whose PR in the BMAB is over 5.00 ... or
maybe 6.00. This would legitimize the Giants List if
enough voters did this.
|
Master Points |
- At least in the U.S.'s ABT system, the size of the field and
the skill level of the tournament (Open, Advanced, or Novice)
directly influence the quantity of points awarded.
|
- Favors attendance
- Can only go up
- Doesn't decay with age
- Doesn't remove luck factor.
- Treats a 0-3 record and a 2-3 record in a tournament as the
same.
|
- Should be
restricted to live tournaments only.
- An example is the
ABT system in the U.S.
|
Larsen-Silliman |
- Limits the effects of attendance
- Only looks at the last 5 years
- Places more
weight on recent years
|
- Only considers
main events
- Currently is only used in the U.S., but it could be expanded
to the rest of the world if agreement could be reached on the
assignment of Master points worldwide. This is not likely
to happen.
- Doesn't remove luck factor.
- Treats a 0-3 record and a 2-3 record in a tournament as the
same.
|
- Is a derivative of
Master Points. It attempts to correct the flaws of the Master
Points system.
- Is
restricted to live tournaments only
- There are a lot of variables that could be tweaked:
number of years considered, weights of each year, weights
assigned to attendance.
|
PR/BMAB |
- Limits the luck
factor
- Unlike Elo, Larsen-Silliman, or Master Points, players from
different playing pools may be fairly compared.
- The BMAB leader (Rick Janowski of the UK) pledges to remove
players if they are idle (no tournament competition) for 18
months.
|
- Labor intensive to derive
- subject to cherry picking
- Due to eXtremeGammon not being perfect, technical issues
with calculating PR, and not considering an opponent's
deficiencies, playing for a low PR is not the same as playing to
win a match.
|
- PR = eXtremeGammon's
Performance Rating
- BMAB is
restricted to live tournaments only.
- (November 23, 2017) To resolve the "labor issue", I
advocate that tournament backgammon be played on computer tablets instead
of on real boards. See the "Solution: section of "Concerns
about the future of tournament backgammon".
|