tbh you lose less ranking points to a newbies than you would playing someone of your own rank - i would prefer to play newbies all the through

complaining about a newbie is fine in a tourney - because it does hide their real potential - however dont use ranking points as an example as you lose less ranking points to a newbie than someone of your own level

Not a complaint in any way emily - just an observation and yes you do lose less points than normal to a n00b if you lose which in a game of str8 say 690 v 930 virt i wud lose about 10 pts and if the opponent was a n00b then around 5pts....

If I won I would get about 0.3 pts.......

If that happened in round one of tourny then the system is flawed....

Not at all, thats why the tourney system fixes the imperfections of the normal ranking system whereby people can avoid such things by choosing the rank of their opponents.

Edit - again though, do remember this is simply a much requested OPTION which has been introduced.

Just like the US games, tournaments, snooker, straight etc before it, there will always be those who dislike it but after a few years most people won't remember when they didnt exist

Edited at 13:08 Wed 27/10/10 (BST)

But only for those that choose to play in a ranked tournament. To make any difference it needs every tournament to be ranked, is that the long term plan?

And on the same basis is there any discussion over auto-pairing in ranked games to even up everything for everybody?

Edit - presumably the above edit to include OPTION was an answer to my question? (sorry if it wasn't) Personally I can't recall anyone asking for it as an option and I can't imagine why anyone would want it as an option when the aim is to iron out ranking imperfections. Should it not be all or nothing? Ideally all in the first instance to test it properly as a trial.

Edited at 15:29 Wed 27/10/10 (BST)

A lot of people (again myself included) like to sit on 800 rank and play tournys/occasional friendlies. That for me is the principal difference having ranked tournys makes. I don't mind seeing maybe one of each game type a day, or maybe even have them run alongside the regular tournys? There was 99 in that one last night because it was the first one ever...the first uk marathon after it was brought back in got around 140. I just don't think it's particularly fair on those who come on just to play tournys only to be primed into risking rank to win them. Then again, I don't particularly care all that much

Totally up to you to do what you want of course, I was just wondering why, if you never played rank, it made any difference whether a tourney was or wasn't as you still get a tourney win stat as normal.



Nope, my edit was written in a rush before heading out from my lunchbreak

There have been no shortage of threads asking for a rank reward option, just take your pick : http://www.funkypool.com/findTopic.do?forumid=6&searchString=ranked+tournaments

As I already mentioned, other than the 3 ball rule removal I think its probably the most requested update in FP history, or indeed pre-FP.

I know what you are suggesting regarding all tourneys being ranked evening out the rankings but unless all games are also ranked it is pointless, and as you can see over the years that has always recieved a poor reception (sadly, as I am all for it!)

Thanks spinner - I know there have been loads suggesting it or requesting it for ages (me being one ) but I still don't really see the benefit to having it as an option, or some ranked and some not, other than it just offering 'something different from the normal'. If that is the aim of it then OK no problem with that at all.

Having them all ranked though might help overcome the general mindset of sitting at 800 (or even 900 for that matter although you do have to play some kind of game to maintain that) - since that word 'Professional' seems to have some kind of special meaning on here.

Alternatively let the daily reduction carry on below 800 at a further reduced rate - but that is something completely off topic and apologies.

One possibility that is worth thinking about is borrowing one aspect from football's international ranking (FIFA World Rankings) which use a similar system (but they adopted it after funkypool!).

They scale the rankings by the importance of the competition like so:


It would seem to me that tournaments on here should weigh rather more heavily than ranked games.

Now we are moving in the right direction

That would be the best way of combining into a single rank (assuming separate tournament ranking is a non-starter) as it would encourage players to enter ranked tournaments rather than stay away as they might possibly at present.

Yes, I could imagine they would enter the tournaments if they are overtaken by similar players due to the increased entropy in the tournament games.

Good idea nick, this is how i tried to say it at the start. The bigger the prize the more the incentive

Thanks. The more I think about it the more I like this idea. Tournaments should be the flagship games of the sites. If the top ranked players get there without playing tournament games it seems wrong.

If this scale was implemented I'd suggest changing it (compared to now) as tournament games multiplied by 1.2, and ranked games multiplied by 0.6 (meaning tournament games would be worth double).

My only worry is the loss scale, would it even out good or could some players find it a struggle to maintain a rank by losing to many points. I guess the best way to find out is trial it. But yeah this seems a good idea.

Could you not make a set time for the ranked tourny? For example, every 9pm tourny would be ranked? With the changes in tournaments every day it makes the tournament different everyday.

This way those who wish to avoid it know which time it is on everyday, and those who wish to play it have the same knowledge.

Edited at 21:28 Wed 27/10/10 (BST)

Only thing is due to people only being able to come on at certain times they wouldnt be able to play so there would have to be about 3 in my opinion so all that want can have a go.

I think if the thinking is for tournament games to take precedence then surely its every tournament all day to be ranked - the same way as you have the option to play normal ranked all day?

This is an absolutely brilliant idea. I know there would be opposition initially to all games being ranked but within 3-6 months people will have forgotten it was ever any different.

as im a very lazy person i havnt read the above posts so apologies if im repeating something, or just not taking in anything that has been said lol,

i put a suggestion forward that if your going to make tournamenst ranked it would be a good idea to make it unavailiable to newbies, and seperate novice, adepts and profs/virts and make it a 3way tournament, 3winners? due to the points barriers.

I somewhat agree with keeping newbies out - but having three tournament winners will have three times the confusion.

No reason to exclude anyone from any tournament and there never should be. Yes ideally there would be no option to deactivate, reset or have more than account but there is.

However what is often ignored is that, long term, the only person penalised by the deactivation or reset is that player themself since they disappear off any table giving them any recognition of their ability.

In the short term it might be frustrating to lose to someone you believe is not a newbie however the odds are that it will happen to everyone around you over time keeping your relative position to everyone else unchanged by these things.

And it should be that position relative to everyone else in the table that is far more important than the actual 'ranked score' you hold.

I really hope Nick pushes this through and then tweaks it as necessary, following any trial, to perfect it.