Correct.


I agree with your thoughts on the possible criteria too - personally I think a mix between rank and tournament win RATE (not just plain wins - we really ought to have a ratio on the profile for tourny wins), would be the best way to go.

Personally, I think there should be "medal's" won at the end of each tournament, with 1st, 2nd and 3rd placed players. Obviously, this relates to Gold, Silver, and Bronze medals added to the user's stats. On top of that, I think it would also be a good idea for the ranking tournaments to be part of SOME tournaments as it would bring a little more competitiveness between players, and would be much more difficult to win the tournament, which is why i would also introduce the "medals" in the tournaments.

As for the 3rd place, the two players who had lost their semi-final game could face each other in a 3rd place play-off to determine who actually came third.

Opinions anyone?

Sounds good to me.

As a start though, number of tournies entered should definitely be recorded, so we could have win RATE calculated. Number of wins doesn't really say that much unless you can compare to the total.

To have a 3rd place medal would mean changing the order of tournaments to accompany a third place match

You would have to change the tournament for the ranking system to occur, so why not implement everything at once?

would that reset all current tournament stats then? or make it seperate so "42 old tournament wins + 4 new tournament wins"

Sending invites for a "bronze final" for the losing semi-finalists shouldn't be such a huge change to implement I'd imagine....

Not the ranking system either really, but would have to link up the rounds to each other rather than new random draw for each round tho.

That's true. I'd prefer it that way tbh, because that way we know who we are likely to play in the final, or next round etc. That way, we would also get a better layed out tournament table which the structure of a flow-chart, perhaps?

Yep, something along the same lines as the cup diagram on the league web site. It can be done a lot better than that by all means, but that's the general idea anyway.

yeah, i think its time for a change in the tournament format and the way the fixtures are figured out.

Yeah that would be a good idea to see, a percentage rate of tournaments entered/ tournaments won, would give a better idea to some who they are playing.

really think its an ex-seeding-ly bad idea and maybe takes the fun out of tournies.

i personally wouldn't likem to see it happen as the likes nof noobs getting a decent run to get to q-f or semi or even final is good for the game.

seedings are used in professional sport in real life, and, therefore not necessary on a pool website geared at fun

this game for me isn't taken so seriously. yes i try my utmost for the clans but when it comes down to it i play because i enjoy it.

No offense, but this argument pops up in virtually every single discussion on this site and getting a bit old for my taste.

And more importantly, since when was there a contradiction between being ambitious, wanting a fair, but competitive game system, vs. playing for fun?

We all define fun differently and I refuse to accept that the "casual" part of the player base should have monopoly on defining what fun should be. More competitive minded players play the way they do and want the game they want for the very same reason: Fun. They just define fun differently.

If seeding was done i would prefer something similar to that used in european/international football where the performance each season is given a score and the seeding is based on the total score of the previous 5 seasons

could just change the seasons to tournys and it gives a more accurate form guide on players

http://www.xs4all.nl/~kassiesa/bert/uefa/calc.html

I think for some people - tournys can get repetitive and for me if i have a hard start and easy final, its just anticlimactic tourny and doesn't feel as earned as a hard-fought final

For seeding to work it would seem to me that there would need to be some way of restricting the entry of people who reset/ have multiple accounts, maybe no tournament entry until certain number of games played or time limts, i.e. account active for a period of time before tournament entry allowed, or combination of the two. Using rank I am not sure about as there are many excellent players who seldom if ever play ranked matches. A stat for tournaments entered and won is a great idea.

Overall I am not sure how seeding in tournaments would improve them unless all entrants have long term records. For me part of the tournament side is not knowing who you will play. Just my thoughts

^^^^^^

All goods points as to why the seedings will probably never accurately reflect the actual ability of players in a given tournament however by resetting, deactivating, having new accounts the only person you would really be 'disadvantaging' is yourself since, as a 'non seeded player' you would be increasing the chance that you will play a good player right from the start.

Exactly man. I just want to hear more yay or nay not the intricacies of it.. Because if there is enough nay then there is no point discussing it at all

Hmmm, not necessarily, I believe? Whatever criteria are used to separate or pair up players in Round 1 can be used again afresh in Round 2 with no need for them to be linked, imo.

As for the main question, seeding would be an interesting idea, and I wouldn't object to it, but I don't mind who I play in a tournament or at what stage I play them.

True enough!

Just so used to the mindset of real world tournaments where typically only the first round is seeded and the following rounds are given from the two preceding matches from the round before etc etc

I dont agree with that as the reward for someone beating a 'top' seed would then be another tough game in the next round rather than clearing a part of the draw out.

If that is the road that you go down then you are better off keeping it as it is in my view.