I Agree Too Ant I Wont Be Joining One Again..

I totally agree with that idea, the amount of rank th top players stand to lose it the only bad thing in this tbh. I do believe it is a good idea but more for the lesser able players or lower ranks that could take full advantage here.

Having set points cannot work within the current ranking system, as has been pointed out many times already.

What you are seeing in that case is the balancing effect of tournaments coming in to play, one of the reasons many people suport them. As a quick example, if that person above normally played anyone, as opposed to only 800-1000 ranked players, they would probably find they lost just as often and so wouldnt have such a high rank as to cause the deficit seen.

So, in the rare case someone does win a tourney but ends up with less rank than they started with, they both have a tourney win under their belt, and their rank has been adjusted to a slightly more realistic level. Win-win

I guess that's the thing thes days, people have high ranks when they really aint that good by playing lower ranks. However those people will just avoid ranked tournies now lol.

I still think they should just split it up into 3 catagories (novice - adept - professional) and expell newbies only problem being from my view is people may just keep their rank lower just to get the tournament wins.

Personally i havent seen these reason, could u please explain why they cannot work?

Also it was just an idea, i wont be takin part in ranked tournies, but thought it might help players who are takin part

Three points -

For it to work at all then all tournaments need to be ranked so your only option would be to play or not play tournaments - but if you choose not to then you miss out on the benefits in the second point below....

Secondly Nick's original post is being overlooked in that tournament games won would carry a higher weighting than normal ranked games making them more attractive to play for everyone, which negates some of the comments mentioned above on ranking points earned/lost in the ranked tournaments the way they currently work.

And finally it brings everyone together under one umbrella - those that just want to play normal ranked games, those that only play tournaments and those that do both. If it works properly then maybe the current top 10's etc won't change (although I can think of quite a few tournament only players that could break in there) but those tables will be a heck of a lot more relevant.

Im with you kay , i wont be joining in chaos_ , bring on the second account i guess , problem solved for me

Just in case you r wondering I will happily play ranked tournies but you shouldnt end up worse off by doing so if you WIN the tournie.

I can easily see situations where you play a marathon tournie and win 3-1, 3-0, 3-2, 4-2, 5-3 and end up much worse off in terms of ranking points.

So how about a bonus system for finalists....

Winner (in addition to the ranked pts) gets 3 pts
Losing finalist (in addition to the ranked pts) gets +1.5 pts

or something similar.....

The thing that makes me laugh about this is that people complain when we haven't got it then we get it and people complain.

People complain about the likes of al_ and davidsylvian not playing higher ranked players, yet these have been joining the ranked tournaments and been liking them and in my eyes been showing that they are not at all bad players who just ranked up vs lower ranks.

We need to respect everything nick does for us and if this means ranked tournaments then fantastic, I am sure most people will adjust in time.

^ too true, i dont mind ranked tournaments in the slightest

If you were to play the same set of opponents in normal ranked games (on the basis that you play anyone at anytime), and had the exact same set of results that you give, then you would emerge at the end of it with less ranking points than you would from your same scenario in the tournament. At least that's how Nick is proposing it work.

Now I dont see what is wrong with that unless you are suggesting you would rather control who you choose to play against - but surely not.

The difficult thing to judge is going to be to work out how much extra weighting to give to tournament games so that there is no advantage to be gained by deliberately avoiding them.

That's not to say there should also be a disadvantage necessarily to not entering tournaments as clearly not everyone has the time to sit and play whole tournaments on here.

I don't believe you can simply do that as described in the current rank scoring system - ie maximum and minimum extremes prevent you simply adding bonus points on as someone like onua would be pushing 2000 before too long. And sticking with the 1000 max and edge modifications he would still be getting only a part of your bonus for winning.

However dont forget that because the tournaments would be weighted heavier than normal ranked games your bonus is already automatically built in and the more you win (further you get) the bigger that bonus.

And if you lose a game does that mean the loss is weighted higher to....as yet we have no clear indication of what will happen but I am looking forward to a 'marathon' ranked tournie with the new weighted system in place....

I just want to add this game is meant to be fun , and from everything iv read above its all getting a bit to serious lol , may i ask what people will do when they aren't playing well (me every second day ) maybe had to many : ) they don't want to play ranked for obvious reasons so a bit of a hit in a tourney is good , doesn't matter if you win or lose , what do those people do ? , play friendly's ? Watch others play ? log off ? Having the option of pressure free games (unranked tournaments ) is a good thing as iv said ranked games are there to play !

Edited at 11:18 Fri 29/10/10 (BST)

Can't be bothered to read the whole thread but sounds like a great idea

Same

Same

Personally i dont really see the problem, it's not as if every tourny is ranked, it's just more options for people.

Me i hate speed tournies however i won't complain because there are only a few and others do like them, this will be the same. Sometimes you gotta take the good with the bad.

The easiest way to explain it is that there are only so many points to be won or lost. If you introduce anything which upsets that balance, it invalidates the existing system.

A seperate ranking system for tournaments has been suggested before, but really all you need for that is to record semis and quarters reached along with wins as we already have.



Yep. To win more you have to risk more for the same reason as above.