Is the ELO ranking a better gauge of player abilities?

[Copper]

Here is a quick poll. There has been a great deal of griping by some (not naming names) about the Blitz ladder not being one that is worthy of playing on.

I say different. For many, the ladder is nothing more than a place to record your games. For others (preening stuffed shirt peacocks who love to admire there stats... like me!), the ELO function of the Blitz ladders makes it a great tool for gauging the relative levels of players, and helps immensely in choosing opponents.

I for one, think the ELO ladder is the true Blitz ladder. No offence to others who do not, to each his own, and the beautiful thing about the blitz.

Do you think the ELO ladder is the 'true' ladder with respect to scores?

(for a quick reminder, the ELO function works like the chess scoring system, where a player with higher scores do not gain from victories over lower scored players as much as higher scored players. Therefore, it forces the higher players to play higher players to improve in the rankings. It also means a loss to a lower scored player can be devestating to the score, and moves incentives away from playing lower ranked players. The incentive systems are fraught with many challenges, many of which have been already been pointed out, but feel free to comment on them, there may be some we have missed)

Cheers!

Leto