horrible idea, people who stopped at 800 rank stayed for a reason. and now all they can play is friendlies seeing as tournaments are ranked. pointless.

maybe with the number of very good players on here at or above 750 (and those who choose to keep their rank down below 700 but who r pros) it is time to revisit the ratios Nick.

It is very unlikely, given the current crop of players, that any top player is going to beat a 730 - 750 in the ratio 7 or 8 to one. Using a linear rule becomes less appropriate as rank gap increases....

These people must have a wonderful life if all they have to worry about is their rankings on an online pool game

well no point arguing you just get some techical explanantion back!

Think ill play to 100 tourney wins then say my goodbyes

Edited at 16:24 Tue 23/11/10 (GMT)

nick cant you see? people are complaining left right and center, the odd few ranked tournys fine. some unranked too.

If people want to play for the bonus tourny wins (e.g) the double points won then have a select few of them.

As for sitting on rankings how the hell do you expect people to play straight? you struggle as it is to find a 800 player to play. yet we're expected to play 750's for tuppance? if anything 800.0 needs to be set back up on straight as its hard to come across the players to play on a daily basis. Check the games now, i bet there's not even more then 5 games of straight all around the 720 rank.

And as yet, the one or two who have mentioned this have never explained what this "reason" is.

Nothing has changed in the ranking deductions other than to make the more reflective of a players ability, which must surely always be a positive thing.




Not really true, certainly if you look at this thread there are one or two, but compare that to the amount of positive replies hundreds playing...

following on from spinner, I would say there was a higher than usual turnout for the tournaments, particularly last night. Now, what does that suggest about the overall views on ranked tournaments?

i will play anyone any rank it does not bother me but i have entered 3 tournaments today lost early on in each to absolute ridiculous flukes and hit and hopes and have lost untold amount of points.

Bit Silly to be honest.

I like the whole idea about tournapoints it makes the game so much more competitive

however i hate all the other changes

next time there is a change can we vote on what we want?

Yay!! First person to hit 1000 Tourneypoints

wd mate

Cheers mate!

only way i could get 1,000 tournapoints is if i was on both sites at same time.

Personally I think it's a great update.

I sat at 800 before the update, too. Not because of the 'professional' tag, but because I don't like playing ranked games any more. And it just happened that I was above 800 when I stopped playing, (Around 830, 9ball)

The point is, now if you're a professional, at least it shows that you can maintain a good rank, and if you fall below 800, you have something to play for, if it means that much to you.

Being below 800 doesn't mean you're not a good player, it never has.

For the sake of a single word on your profile, some people cause a huge fuss.

If you have split rank tournaments, it takes away the whole ideology of being able to play everyone, which can only happen currently in tournament games, remove that and it'll be even more separate across the site.

Once again, I like previous idea of having two tournaments running every hour-one ranked, one friendly, but with tournaPoints available in both. Obviously this would depend on the amount of interest in both.

The natural daily decrease drop would show a players rustiness, but how can you say that the possible rank dropped from losing (coupled with the daily drop) show the rustiness of the player? In my opinion, if a good player doesn't come on for a week or two and loses about 10 points, then comes on and loses another 20 in the first few games in a tournament (by losing 3-0 or scraping 2-1 wins), it hardly shows 'rustiness' and would require a number of games to be played in order to get that rank back.

What are people's thoughts in rather than having a daily increase, the rank may decrease once every three days instead?

I do also agree with Al's point above, where the multiplier rule is less appropriate as rank the gap increases-be it a 550 against a 750 or a 750 against a 950. It isn't fair when it comes to such extremes, which can happen in tournaments and where a fluked win is so easily possible without chances to level out the ratio.

Edited at 20:05 Tue 23/11/10 (GMT)

If a player is still losing points after the rank drop, then possibly their rank has not been dropped low enough to represent their current (rusty) ability.

However, when (or if) the player gets their ability back (loses their rustiness) they will make points back at a rate proportional to the difference, so the initial convergence will be the quickest. As an example I'd say being 10 points below would take 6 (tournament) games to get back to your level, and 20 points would take 9 games. I don't think this would be too unreasonable?

I understood that, but I was talking about entering a tournament as the first game you play. You would expect good players, providing they don't get an unkind draw, to make it through the first three rounds, so if they win 2-1 against people of quite lower rank and hence lose (I'm not sure on the exact numbers, but I believe mine are possible) say 5 points because of it, then get knocked out in the fourth round by losing 2-0 and consequently lose a further six from that. They will then have lost 11 odd points, coupled with whatever they may have lost from their reduction, so they would have to win a much larger number of ordinary ranked games in order to win those back after the tournament, which may not be possible if they had only been on for an hour or two, then the next reduction period would come into effect.

If the reduction period was instead extended, the amount lost over a fortnight of inactivity would be kinder and reflect their ability more. Although finding a balance between that and those that play daily is difficult, I do appreciate. Possibly having those over a certain rank lose rank daily, those under it lose rank once every 3 days instead?

Great update...one small query (off thread topic), why does someone leaving game as you are playing shot change the aim of the shot..annoying if you happen to be on good break in straight when this occurs.

I take that all back! Awesome update!