Well this is my idea i was thinking of a win percentage but you of had to play a 100 games or more i dont know if this will go down well but all i would like to hear is all you opinions.



thank you your says

i say at least a thousand games mate

other than that it sounds like a brill idea

yeah actuall i agree with you but thank you

There are 2 problems with this - it could encourage people to choose weaker opponents and people may retire at the top.

if you made it 5000 games instead, then anybody who retired at the top would have to have won a staggering amount of games and would probably deserve to remain there!

Well how about, you need to play 5,000 games to get onto the leader board and if you don't play a game for say 1- 2 months you get removed from the leader board.

If he/she decides to play again then you would need to play 10,000 games to regain a place on the leader board?
That would encourage people to play.

As much as a like win percentage as a "truer" indicater of overall skill than rank, there are limitations. Aside from the problem Nick mentioned (which would also make life less fun for newbies, and we want as many members as possible) the system would have the same problems as the old rank system.

Specifically, the fact that unless the percentage were calculated to around 3 decimal points, the leaderboard would just be full of people on the same percentage. with no real meaing gained.

It's not like golf either, before thats mentioned, since you cant have multiple occurances of a ratio

Not wanting to name names but its still flawed, there are certain people who always play low ranked opponents, isn't a true refection on someones skill!

dave- i dont think he meant to replace rank system we have now......as an additional table?
tally- i know what you mean, david does get run outs and that as well so he cant be that bad...lol

I was just meaning it's usefulness as even a seperate stat is limited due to it's range being like the old rank - 1 to 100.

Now, what if percentages were calculated to two decimal places, and them you multiply a players win percentage by their rank....

That is a VERY debatable claim.

Win percentage can easily be manipulated by playing low rank opponents.

Rank can not.

Rank can on the other hand be manipulated to some extent by selecting opponents who play worse than their rank should suggest, but that is not a displayed stat and those players are therefore much harder to single out.