http://www.englishchess.org.uk/?p=18494
Elo v Glicko
http://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-conte ... Glicko.pdf
To my mind there's a very obvious flaw in Glicko based systems, which would apply if FIDE tried to introduce one.
What that means is that if you were performing at around 180 over a season in domestic events and around 2100 in rated events, that if you played a domestic event every week and a FIDE event every two months, you would be treated as relatively inactive for the FIDE event. So any fluctuations in results would lead to a magnified change in rating. Thus is you play in two consecutive events, with a performance of 2200 in the first and 2000 in the second, under Glicko you get a higher rating than if you perform at 2000 in the first and 2200 in the second.Glicko features wrote:Rating deviation increases due to inactivity and decreases after game results are submitted.
I would also say that I'm not convinced that rating systems should be designed around supposed predictive ability. I would suggest the lesser aim of ranking players in the correct order. In other words, the number one ranked player is the one you expect to make the best score against a field of players of comparable strength without expecting precision as to how much his score will exceed that of the second ranked player.