cheat rank? Please explain what you mean by this. The current rank makes it much easier to fluke your way to the top of the tables! (tis the only reason i'm getting near the top )

9us speed tournament at lets say 7pm british time. This is peak time for people to play this game. 9us is extremely flukey, with only one ball needed to be potted for the game to be won. Lets say a rank 680 goes on a lucky run. He takes between 4-6 points from pro's, and throughout the whole tourny if he plays 5 matches, and then 2 in the final he's gained potentially 40 points in a tournament! I'm sorry but thats ridiculous.

I would be for a reversal of ranks, back to where ranked games actually mean something, and tournaments aren't blown out of proportion.

EXCUSE ME! Dont you dare claim you beat me, i fell asleep in front of the laptop and i got DQ'd. Cheeky begger!

RANKINGS: _stranger_ 798.5 (+9.9), diamond_cut 902.9 (-9.5)

for someone who's nearly pro, to beat someone who's barely virt, and take 10 points. It's a joke, get it sorted...

Same player but.....

RANKINGS: _stranger_ 806.2 (+7.7), onevisit 828.8 (-7.4)

if it was orig you could lose at least 12.

precisely dgen

make it more interesting and maybe ucy can lose abit more

Original Tournament - whocares8x8 (0) 21-67 (1) sarahh
RANKINGS: sarahh 774.7 (+14.8), whocares8x8 954.3 (-14.1)

this was from few days ago (sorry seb ) but this is what you can lose on snooker in a tournament.

on old rankings (2 years ago) you would lose even more (close to 20 points) so to be honest pool has got off lightly.

Rose tinted glasses there me thinks. Ranking points system is the same in snooker and pool. Difference in the one example is the almost 200 points difference.

its a huge difference, original and straight you lose more rank than any other type, arcade on snooker is the same on pool as it roughly takes same amount of time.

even 100 points difference you can lost 12, in orig on same rank ive even lost 8 points, on pool (except straight) you could lose about 2 or 3.

rank is based on length of the game type, long types like straight, power and orig you lose ALOT more than arcade/normal pool where its over fairly quickly.

I whooped ucy's butt in 8 ball marathon other day was 3 - 0 me and i took like 19 points off him and he lost virt tbh thats a real joke that is

well thats average at about 6.5 a game.

if that was orig snooker he would have lost at least 35 points, reg would have been about 30 points, arcade ive seen 10 points lost a game but mostly about 6 or 7 vs a virt.

this is what im trying to say, until you have played snooker as a virt (preferably reg/orig/power) then you will know about losing major rank.

Yeah but James thats snooker not pool haha and i would say the same on snooker on both games it is a joke and should be sorted.

Edited by forum moderator spinner, at 08:40 Wed 09/03/11 (GMT)

Heres a weird one never seen this before.


kal_el88 potted black ball (foul)
RESULT: 8 Ball Pool UK Ranked - kal_el88 (0) loses to cushion (1) by a foul on the black
RANKINGS: cushion 858.1 (+0.0), kal_el88 674.6 (-0.4)
cushion's score change was reduced by 89.8% because kal_el88 was a newbie

that's a joke, you get nothing, should be a minimum at least even if they are a newbie. you'd've got slated harshly if they won.

He would have got less that 0.05 but more than 0, you wont get just 0 for winning a game but as the ranking system rounds to 1 decimal place it has rounded down here.

I like the ranking system it is way more competitive with more players getting higher ranks, it's here now so just deal with it.

that was also kak_el88's first ever game of uk so with the rank difference and him being a newbie it would drive it right down

A possible addition could be to introduce a two tier system for normal ranked games?

The first would be the existing ranked games as they are now where you can play whoever you wish to play with the reduced ranking points on offer as they are now.

The second would be auto-pairing of ranked games with either the first available opponent or else the first available opponent within a ranking score range. For these games the ranking points available would be on a par with those available in tournaments.

That would seem to be a fair system for all - those that want to play tournaments or ranked or both - whilst at the same time reducing the opportunities for people to succeed by carefully selecting or vetting their opponents as was seen before. Plus it still gives players the option of playing competetive games against mates. All it would require it seems is to add another option when creating or joining games.

I played him 3 times there was no one else to play at the time was taking a risk continuing to play.

Are you not meant to give a reason to editing a post? It was fine the way it was nothing was wrong with it.

RESULT: 8 Ball Pool UK Ranked - baller123456 (0) loses to psycho (1) with 2 balls remaining
RANKINGS: psycho 841.2 (+0.0), baller123456 669.7 (-0.5)
psycho's score change was reduced by 89.4% because baller123456 was a newbie

yeah well looks like i got loads eh? wtf lol

shouldint you always get something off a player in a ranked game? fix this please .