league rating for seeding

[glbert-does]

instead of the lichess rating, some sort of internal league rating using only league games could be implemented for seeding. in some cases, this might be an improvement.

there are several practical issues (off the top of my head: initial rating = lichess rating? when and after how many league games to change into a league rating? maybe mix them smoothly somehow? which league games would count exactly for this, i.e. would it be over all leagues or only for one? what happens if someone stops playing the leagues for a while? sometimes league result and lichess result is not the same – what happens there?).

to me it is unclear whether it would be worth the trouble; or if it would solve more issues than it would create.

[hopffgam]

To me it is unclear which problem we are trying to address with this change exactly. Without knowing which problem we are trying to solve this just seems like an over-complication to me.

[glbert-does]

the supposed problem is that at least at the lower rating levels, league performance and lichess ratings can be out of sync. for someone playing a lot of both, this can be a bit annoying. the reference for this is marcind75, who at the time of this writing has a lichess rating of 1604 (and has had a comparable lichess rating forever), but an all-time team4545 performance rating of 1301 and a lw performance rating of 1439. one possible explanation is that the pool is weaker than the league at that rating level; another possible explanation is that for some reason they play at different strenghs in the league versus the pool; yet another explanation is that their league performance rating is not very stable.

either way, it does make some sense that very long scheduled (i.e. league) games are not played by everyone at the same strength compared to random pool games.

but yes, i agree it is likely an over-complication.