i think it would be great if for ranked games some kind of eligibility criteria is introduced. say for eg. if a player has x points he can play only those who have points in the range x-50 to x+50. This would require pro's (and similarly adept) to compete against each other for points and stop them taking advantage of newbies. it would rule out the possibility of people using fake profiles too(i have seen a few with points around 650) for reducing scores of other players. And also, would reduce the annoyance caused by newbies to regular players. (everytime i login, i can find atleast one room named "no newbies" )

You say pros are taking advantage of newbies, but I think newbies gain a lot from playing pros in the area of tips and gameplay ideas.

Newbies want to play higher rank players too. It presents a challenge

The points system also means that a pro gets very few points for beating a newbie, in fact around a 5-0 to 7-0 win is generally required to gain as many points as they'd gain from beating a fellow pro.

It's not a bad idea, but I think it takes away free choice and variation.

Edited at 11:08 Sat 12/05/07 (BST)

I think the best solution all-round, which we had to this; was the idea of having rank displayed by room owner. This also solves a couple other problems.

If you are that determined to play a certain rank, you can wait until someone apropriates game becomes available to join.

The best part of this is that it doesn't encourage rank discrimination, which isn't advocated by the site.

i like magics idea if he means what i think he does. On the game window when you view who owns a room something displaying their ranking would be perfect

precisely!

Magic's idea is good and so is the point of newbies learning from pro's. But i think if the range (x - , x+ ) is selected carefully, it might not hurt that much. a player with say 875 points playing someone with say 650 points looks very awkward. I must confess that a few days back, i defeated someone very low ranked for some 10 consecutive games after what i realized that the opponent infact was really sad about the defeats. The person was demotivated by losing continuously rather than learning something. i too felt then that it was unfair and hence thought about presenting this suggestion here.

Well, as i've said many times before, this is the oldest game related subject on the forums.

Its interesting to notice that a few years ago when i suggested this (among many many other) way of solving the problem it was shot down.

Although i liked the "everyone plays everyone" concept it is very clear that it has run its course, and the majority of user opinion is for a degree of selectivity.

I see the same thing being asked for on snooker so maybe there will be a change of policy at last.

(anyone tried a search for this? Scary number of results!!!)

Initially, i used to think that the "a small daily point reduction" for pro's is harsh for them. But now i feel that it doesn't really matter much. ppl, If with very high probability you want to be at the top given the current ranking system, a simple analysis would reveal that you don't need extraordinary skills or practice but you need:
1) a target (someone with very low rank compared to you)
2) time.

Well, since this is apparently deemed the "official" thread on this topic, lets bump it.

I have no problems understanding and appreciating the concept of all-play-all, but that would require a system that totally would prevent fake ranks - which is obviously, sadly not possible.

Until that day, people ARE gonna be selective to some degree or another, and it would spare absolutely everyone involved for a lot of fuzz if rank were to be displayed in the game selection window.

I can't say I like the idea of limiting the rank range you can play against too much tho - too many good reasons have already been given as to why people should be free to play against whatever rank they choose.

I would LOVE a simple rule preventing any resetters from ever playing ranked games again tho, but that's my opinion.

Edited at 22:56 Tue 18/09/07 (BST)

Martin is right in the sence that when I lose a game regardless of what type it is always going to be around 5 points lost. If a newbie beats me it is only 3 points lost. However they gain 6 points or more. If a newbie beats me 2-0 he's gone over 12 rank in 2 games. Thats insane. If anything this needs to be looked at more than poeple taking advantage of newbies.

The problem isn' t lowbies with only a few games played - the problem is 600/700s that play on high 800 level ;)

As for losing 5 pts per game - you don't do that if you play players on your own level ;)

I still think you should keep the all-on-all game concept but modify the creating game bit. Maybe you should have a buttom which allows you to limit the players allowed into your game.

It could range from:
Anyone
700-800
650-850

etc.

Just make it so its flexible, then you can pick a game to go into that you know is around your level