Like Cohensius, I’ll assume you wish to create a participant score to your group’s hearts video games. I assume that an Elo primarily based system is extra difficult than you want/need.
Recommend the next:

1. Rate participant primarily based on sport outcomes, as a substitute of hand outcomes. The aim in hearts is to win the sport and this enormously reduces your information entry.
2. Need a rating to charge every gamers lead to every sport. The scoring methodology I selected for a match I ran was: [player’s points] – [winner’s points] + (fixed between 0 and 100, if not the winner). For my elimination match I selected a reasonably excessive fixed, however level differential alone could also be adequate to your group. It is simpler to elucidate as “the typical variety of factors the participant looses by”.
3. Player score is the typical of their sport scores.

Unlike an Elo system, this method would not tackle the next points:

A. Some gamers bettering over time.

B. Stronger (or weaker) gamers enjoying one another extra typically.
This sort of score is probably going adequate for a social group of underneath 15 gamers, particularly if video games are NOT organized by ability stage.

If you do need to account for a bigger group with a wider vary of expertise, I like to recommend the next:

4. Instead of the fixed referenced in merchandise 2, calculate further factors given to non-winners as [Sum of ratings of players in game]/4.
5. New gamers ought to begin with a score at or above the group’s common score.

One extra scoring rule I like to recommend:

6. Any rating above 100 is taken into account 100 when calculating level differential with winner.
   This rule helps decrease the penalty for remaining determined makes an attempt to win through a run.