Should OGS switch to whole-history ratings?

[Elom0]

A short while ago OGS switched to Glicko-2. However I'm beginning to get the feeling that maybe OGS would LIKE to use Whole-History Rating, since they already give your current rating when showing your past games, which doesn't make a lot of sense.

So adding Whole-History ratings to Glicko-2 would probably make the best rating system.

[jeromie]

I think the impediment to WHR is primarily psychological. Players who don’t pay close attention to rating systems (most of them) generally don’t like it when their rank changes when they aren’t playing. Even if you only update ratings when someone plays a game, many people complain loudly when their rank goes down after winning a game. (OGS currently uses a history window, so this can sometimes happen. You can find many complaints in the message boards.) I think WHR would likely increase the frequency of this issue, and the comparative gain in rating accuracy might not be worth it.

I think one solution that would allow the use of a more accurate rating system would be to disconnect rank from rating, as GoQuest does. Having your rank reflect your maximum achievement while your rating reflects your current level softens the blow of losing a few rating points. There’s a lot of history in using ranks to decide matchups and handicaps, though, so that idea might meet resistance in the community.

[Elom0]

I think the impediment to WHR is primarily psychological. Players who don’t pay close attention to rating systems (most of them) generally don’t like it when their rank changes when they aren’t playing. Even if you only update ratings when someone plays a game, many people complain loudly when their rank goes down after winning a game. (OGS currently uses a history window, so this can sometimes happen. You can find many complaints in the message boards.) I think WHR would likely increase the frequency of this issue, and the comparative gain in rating accuracy might not be worth it.

I think one solution that would allow the use of a more accurate rating system would be to disconnect rank from rating, as GoQuest does. Having your rank reflect your maximum achievement while your rating reflects your current level softens the blow of losing a few rating points. There’s a lot of history in using ranks to decide matchups and handicaps, though, so that idea might meet resistance in the community.

Well that indeed is a very illogical complaint, and is probably a sign of unhealthy rank dependency and then online baduk anxiety, so they need help, not having objectively better rating systems not used in favour of ones based of off feeding their unhealthy anxiety. In fact that is a very reason why I would deliberately want a rating system where your rank drops after a win. Oddly enough the rating system I plan to make doesn't include games played in the most recent time block. In a way a prefer playing in underanked rating systems and pools like OGS was at the lower levels (which imply I should be playing over-the board EGF).

You make some really good points. I would tell those who complain that this a good opportunity to fix there obsession with ratings when they value having their rating increase after a game as more important than the literal reason the rating system exists, rating accuracy. If the sole purpose of a game of go to you is to increase your rating and ranking, you are either not right in the head or are deliberately disrespecting weiqi!