Split
42d0269e56
- Created new ELO module (src/elo/) with: - Simple rating-only system (no RD or volatility tracking) - Standard ELO expected score calculation - Per-point performance scoring - Effective opponent formula for doubles - Full test suite (21 tests, all passing) - Updated main.rs to use ELO calculator: - Per-point scoring: performance = points_scored / total_points - Effective opponent in doubles: Opp1 + Opp2 - Teammate - K-factor = 32 for casual play - Created analysis tool (src/bin/elo_analysis.rs): - Reads match history from database - Recalculates all ratings using pure ELO - Generates before/after comparison (JSON + Markdown) - Updated documentation: - New LaTeX report (rating-system-v3-elo.tex) - Simplified explanations (no volatility/RD complexity) - Plain English examples and use cases - FAQ section - All tests passing (21/21 ELO tests) - Code compiles without errors - Release build successful
102 lines
3.6 KiB
Markdown
102 lines
3.6 KiB
Markdown
# LaTeX Title Options (Pick Your Sass Level)
|
|
|
|
## Option 1: The Carry Problem
|
|
**"The Carry Problem: A Rating System That Finally Accounts for Your Terrible Doubles Partner"**
|
|
|
|
*Vibe:* Funny, relatable, speaks directly to the v2 innovation (effective opponent)
|
|
*Subtitle works:* "How I built a rating system that accounts for whether your partner is holding you back (or you are)"
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Option 2: Self-Deprecating Journey
|
|
**"I Needed to Know How Bad I Actually Was: Building a Pickleball Rating System That Doesn't Lie"**
|
|
|
|
*Vibe:* Personal narrative, self-aware, honest
|
|
*Works well because:* Sets up the journey (you built this to figure out the truth about yourself)
|
|
*Subtitle option:* "And why your doubles partner isn't the problem (probably)"
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Option 3: The Maximum Sass
|
|
**"No More Excuses: A Mathematically Rigorous Rating System for Blaming Your Partner"**
|
|
|
|
*Vibe:* Cheeky, acknowledges the real reason people care about ratings
|
|
*Subtitle:* "(Or Finally Admitting It Might Be You)"
|
|
*Best for:* Opening with humor but delivering rigor
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Option 4: The Honest Take
|
|
**"How Bad Am I, Actually? A Rating System for People Who Need to Know"**
|
|
|
|
*Vibe:* Vulnerable, funny, direct
|
|
*Works because:* Everyone who uses a rating system wants to know this
|
|
*Subtitle:* "Plus, does my partner actually suck? (Math says...)"
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Option 5: The Clever One
|
|
**"The Carry Problem: When Your Rating Doesn't Match Your Ego"**
|
|
|
|
*Vibe:* Self-aware sass, speaks to a real problem
|
|
*Best for:* Rec players who know exactly what you mean
|
|
*Full title with subtitle:*
|
|
```
|
|
The Carry Problem: When Your Rating Doesn't Match Your Ego
|
|
A Mathematically Principled Rating System for Pickleball
|
|
(That Finally Accounts for Whether Your Partner Sucks)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## My Recommendation
|
|
|
|
Go with **Option 5** with this structure:
|
|
|
|
### Main Title:
|
|
**"The Carry Problem: When Your Rating Doesn't Match Your Ego"**
|
|
|
|
### Subtitle:
|
|
**"A Mathematically Principled Approach to Rating Pickleball Players (And Proving Whether Your Partner Is Holding You Back)"**
|
|
|
|
### Authors:
|
|
Split (Implementation) & Dane Sabo (System Design)
|
|
|
|
**Why this works:**
|
|
- Opens with the pain point everyone relates to (the carry)
|
|
- Funny and self-aware
|
|
- The subtitle delivers the rigor + the hook
|
|
- "The Carry Problem" is specific to pickleball (team sport aspect)
|
|
- Sets up the v2 innovation beautifully: the system DOES account for partner strength
|
|
- Sassy but not mean-spirited
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Alternative (If You Want Maximum Cheeky):
|
|
|
|
**Main:** "No More Excuses: A Mathematician's Guide to Blaming Your Partner (With Proof)"
|
|
|
|
**Subtitle:** "Building a Rigorous Rating System for Recreational Pickleball"
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## For the Table of Contents:
|
|
|
|
Whichever title you pick, the abstract can be:
|
|
|
|
> "This paper addresses a critical gap in recreational pickleball: a rating system that distinguishes between your skill and your partner's ability to carry you. We redesign the Glicko-2 system with three key improvements: per-point expected value scoring, corrected rating distribution, and a personalized 'effective opponent' formula for doubles. The result is a mathematically principled system that is brutally honest about your actual skill level—and whether your partner really is the problem."
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## What I'll Update
|
|
|
|
Just tell me which title you want and I'll:
|
|
1. Update the LaTeX document title page
|
|
2. Update the abstract
|
|
3. Commit the change with a clean message
|
|
4. Everything else stays the same
|
|
|
|
**My vote:** Option 5 (The Carry Problem) — it's got sass, it's specific to the sport, and it perfectly sets up why v2's effective opponent formula matters.
|
|
|
|
What's your pick? 🎾
|