I apologize if I missed this somewhere, but I didn't see this on the site. I feel like an overall rating should be so simple that everyone understands how it is calculated. Unfortunately, it is not intuitive. I never looked closely until today.
1) At first I thought that the Rating might simply be the average of Looks and Performance. That obviously isn't the case.
2) Next I tried a weighted average (e.g., 60% Looks and 40% Performance and vice versa). That didn't work.
3) Then I tried the average of Looks, Performance and (Chemistry + Location). Based on a few examples, it is not clear whether or not that works because the numbers displayed for Chemistry and Location only go out to one decimal place. In other words, if I am using rounded numbers (e.g., 5/4.5), but the calculation is using 4.95/4.47, then we are going to get different answers. So is the answer: 1) there is a bug in the system (beta site), 2) the Rating is the average of Looks, Performance and (the sum of Chemistry + Location - except the calculation goes out to more decimal places), or 3) the Rating is some sort of weighted average of Looks, Performance, Chemistry, and Location.
Example (a real profile):
Rating 8.89
Looks 8.31 / Performance 8.51
Chemistry 5
Location 5
(8.31 + 8.51 + 5 + 5) / 3 = 8.94 (different from 8.89 because rounded numbers were used for Chemistry and Location).
I tried a weighted average of 35% Looks, 35% Performance, and 30% an average of Chemistry and Location, and that worked pretty well. More often that not, it was exactly right, and when it was a little off, it seemed to be when there was a difference in scores between Chemistry and Location. Probably Chemistry has more weight than Location. Providers that didn't have a score yet in either Chemistry or Location used the old system, which was strictly an average between Looks and Performance. I did see one provider had a score for Chemistry but not Location, and my calculation was more off in that case.
.
Even though my weighted average isn't quite accurate, the fact that providers lacking the new ratings get scored the old way helps make sense of the discrepancies in the current Top 100 rankings and scores.
To be perfectly honest, I don't think that it should be clear how the rankings are calculated.
The more abstract it is the harder it will be to game.
-- Modified on 4/25/2017 1:55:21 PM