Anyone who wins a five round tourney will have won 11 ranked games. Even if their average rank win were only 3 points that would mean you had won 33 points.

Quite a good reward i think!

yeah and when youre at 850 rank and you play coolballs or someone like that you tellin me ur not gonna be a bit wounded if you lose a 9ball tourny final 4 nil to him and not only lose the final but lose 23 points cos they are 675 rank and never EVER play ranked games. Stupid idea just because of that i think though a compromise where you wouldnt lose 5 points every game could be better.

One small point being missed here.

There wont be anyone in the tourney who "never ever plays ranked games", because the tourneys will be ranked, so after a few weeks everthing will level out.

True say about coolballs madmiketyson, and hotstuby! Those two users never played ranked but are real good...

But good point spinner!

i thought of that while i was writing it but is that fair then that 850plus ranked when they play guys like those pair they gonna lose so many points even if its just for a few weeks til they are virtuoso or whatever they end up as.
like i said it could work if you changed the points system but if i was ranked at 900 on 8ball and drew them i wouldnt even bother going cos youll get 3 games max and could lose loads.
and yeah you might be selctive about who you play to get there but so what.
id like to play the best players and get points but invariably it ends up pretty close with very little gained or lost when i play someone of a similar rank. so to get my points up i play "worse ranked" players as most people do.
I still enjoy a few games with a fellow pro but only when i got time to play a few games cos when you have 2 good players playing each other one mistake usually ends the game and the other person clears up.

Ranked tournaments is a nice enough idea but I just don't think it will work. People will be too reluctant to enter.

Also it is hard to compare tournaments. For example someone can win the 4 am tournament (UK time) when there are very few entrants, get a perfect tourny and gain a decent amount of rank; someone else can win the 8 or 9 pm tournament with upto 100 entrants, lose a couple of games along the way (it generally happens in the longer tournaments) and gain very little, if any, even though it is more of an achievement

Good point there. It would put people off entering.

'More entrants - More rank gained' idea springs to my mind. Could help even things out a bit and get more people entering these tournaments, and it would make those tournament wins all the more special .

Edited at 19:59 Wed 13/06/07 (BST)

If there are more entrants, there are more games to play, therefore if all games were ranked (as explained above), the winner will have gained even more rank.

Using the 3 point average, someone winning 256 entrant (8 round) tournament will have won 51 points!

(note that if this were actually implimented you would be more likely to be meeting higher ranked players in later rounds and therefore inevitably gaining more than 3 per game)

How about, instead of having all tournaments ranked, have one tourny of one game every day that will be ranked ie. 8 ball US tournament rank will be played today, tommorow will be 8 ball UK etc...and who ever wants to enter it, will enter. So basically, it'll just be a new addition to tournaments just like the speed tournaments, and when it's available to join it'll say something like (Example only)'8 ball UK rank tournament is available to join(10 minutes till start)'

Your thoughts...?

Nice idea.

No harm in trying it out!

If you win a 4am tournament your rank would only shoot up if you beat players of a similar rank along the way.

The way I see it, if all tournaments were ranked you would get fewer people entering them at first, but then as good tournament players overtook the protective rank players the protective rank players would end up entering the tournaments because they would realise there are a whole bunch of good players who they should be testing themeselves against to be seen as one of the genuinely best players on the site and that could only be a good thing because the tournaments would be more competitive.

As I and spinner have said in this thread, it will take a while - maybe up to a couple of months or so for the playing field to be levelled out but only then will we see a true reflection of ranking rather than the false one which people like me ignore because we know being top ranked doesn't mean you're the best, it means you've chosen carefully who you play.

Well true say myfriendfats, since some people are so protective about their ranks, would it not be a good idea to have a complete new tournament rank?

Basically, for the 'rank tournaments'you play you will have a separate gained and loss ranks just for that specific tournament instead of taking/gaining points on your actual games that has taken you so long to get your rank high on...

Thoughts?

having 2 ranks is too messy for a simple game like pool

but then as good tournament players overtook the protective rank players the protective rank players would end up entering the tournaments because they would realise there are a whole bunch of good players who they should be testing themeselves against to be seen as one of the genuinely best players on the site and that could only be a good thing because the tournaments would be more competitive.
myfriendfats

This is also my point (i think) i dont mind playing those players and testing myself but i dont want to be playing someone who is good if not better than me in a tourny and laying 5 points out for a defeat and winning 0.6. thats just crap.