What about we can play and choice the amount of points we play on rank

eg. Crazzy versus bloggs we agree with 10 points!!

I win and get the points, this is like a gamble on your points but you have the option to play, maybe have a gamble with your high scoring mate!!

Gives you the chance to gamble points ! but without serious risk

lol anyhow what you think

and what about cheats who will create multiple accounts to play each other to gain a high rank?

yeah, good point

People already cheat.

The current system already uses algorithm's and stuff to make it near impossible to get to the high levels.

Also i could create a new account and decide to play someone for 325pts and bang im at 1000. Happy days. Therefore gives even less of an indication of ability than the current system does.

Chaps you have a short view!

Cheats will be dealt with yes! and even if they join as newbies they will be low rank so wont matter!!

Remember what i said u get the chance to choice who u play



Never mind new ideas eh eh!!!

Taking all into account said, yes people could cheat but will be caught.

and prehaps and limit

say
max on the line = 10
min on the line = 1

yeah...virtuso's idea may work....

I know that people have suggested this in the past, but what if we had like a seperate ranking table.

One 'serrious' ranking table for ranked games and another 'fun' ranking table for bets and that?

If we had that, it may work very well.

yes but with this idea, every game would be 10pts to the winner(cheater)and would only take 25 games to reach 900 virtuoso,am no mathematician but to do it the current way of how the ranking system works it would take far more games in a row to get to a rank of 900 for eg and is extremely suspicious however winning 25 in a row is not so unusual and would not be picked up on so easily for cheating

People already do that, it's prohibited and already have to be handled.. How is this any different?

This has been mentioned lots of times, but the effect it will have on the ranking system is pretty obvious.

Any system whereby people are "judged" (rank tables) by the same system, but allwed to score differently for the same achievement is flawed from the outset.

The usual compromise that is reached when this idea comes up is to have "locked" sessions of games.

For example, the players commit to playing a race to 3 with the rank awarded at the end rather than per game (thus risking 3x the rank for 3x the reward)

Obviously if a player leaves early for any reason, they forfiet the rank decided upon. But thats the risk you take.

An extra confirmation box would make sure no-one enters without understanding what they are committing to.

"however winning 25 in a row is not so unusual and would not be picked up on so easily for cheating"

But they do pick it up daveygee

Not many win 25 on run mate not unless they very unlucky
!!

Nice views with points games we never know what funky do next

tbh I don't like this idear it could cause alot of cheating and mods will have a big joob to do, however it could be implented cas of the response your getting, Its pretty positive



and this is one of the reasons i don't like the idear, say if i was 676 and i played someone at 897 in this situation if i lost ill loose like 0.54 points and he'll get like 0.65 pionts aswell. So if we chose our possible rank theres a high chance tht the person ranked 897 is going to choose 10, then they agree. then it goes the same way i explained it, I would say thats cheating but he wouldn't realise you see were am coming from ladds

Edited at 09:48 Tue 15/04/08 (BST)

as i did say before in my other post, I do like this idea. But after reading other people's response to it....is it really worth the time to bring this in?

yes, there will be cheaters, but thats anywhere you go. Yes, the ranks may go a little whacky but I also stand by my idea of a seprate ranking account for betting....

even if there was a second system of ranking with this, is it really worth the time and effort of putting this in?

i would rather have the clocks run on time or random game implemented on my 'to do list' rather than an tricky, game changing assignment like this one.

What if you were in this situation, Say if i wanted to play for 6 points but my oponent wanted to play for 8points and we cept on debating?

And also i think any decent player could reach 950+ in one day, when there starting rank of the day was probs 812, its like were trying to make the game eaiser

Edited at 10:05 Tue 15/04/08 (BST)

well in your first scenario, a game room would be set up like it is now, so the creator of the room decides how many they are betting (thats my way I would have it)

and second one; i think thats whats causing most of this debate...thats why if this was to be braught in, a second rank systme would be needed.

the 'original rank system' for normal games and the 'new rank system' for bets.

well in your first scenario, a game room would be set up like it is now, so the creator of the room decides how many they are betting (thats my way I would have it)





i like that idear, well said