Hi everyone, what do you think about getting ranking points for winning a tournament? maybe a set total of about 5 or 10 for winning? Rather than have ranked tournies just do this instead, then you dont lose just gain! Plus it'd give you a bit more incentive to win!

I agree with that, and maybe a couple of points for the losing finalist (this suggestion has nothing to do with the fact I lose 90% of my finals at all)

lol yea good idea

...just thought - points for tourny wins adds an element of fairness to things too. Some players concentrate on racking up their ranking points, while some spend loads of time in tournys - points for success in tournys would balance things out a little.

exactly what i thought, just wondered if anyone else would say it though nice one m8, the ranking system would be much more accurate

Edited at 12:41 Sat 6/05/06 (BST)

I don't know how many times this topic has been brought up. Apparently it cant happen because its too complicated to organise or something.

yea to organise a ranked tourny. not points for just winning one, totally different.

This is something me and nick are looking at. The tournament / ranking issue.

All we can say is it is in a discussion stage and things will be changed.

Good idea and discussion.

I know its an ongiong subject but yes, ranked tourneys would be great, but only if all the games were ranked. This keeps things fair. After all the person who wins the tourney can effectively only have won one game more than those who lost!

It would be a great way to mix up play between newbies and pro's..

Excellent!

I disagree spinner. The person who wins will win more games than someone who goes out in the first one or two rounds surely? Plus they deserve something from their effort. If you was a 900 rank and you went along all the way to win a tourny with it being ranked then fine, IF you didnt lose a game. If you lost 2 games and still won the tourny you could end up losing points. If the winner just gets points then its win win for everyone, no losing of points at all. After all thats what ranked games are for. I just think the winner deserves abonus.

Would Paraguay deserve a medal for getting beat in the second round of the world cup? They could win their group (hopefully not) and then get beat and end up winning one less game than eventual winners. Do they deserve anything? I think not because they werent good enough.

It seems to have been overlooked that the tourney winners already get recognition, the equivalent of the medal analogy.

Put it this way, if i meet you in the semi, and beat you, i would get nothing. Yet if i met you in the final, and beat you, i get x points. Whats the difference? I still beat the same player...

Whats the difference?

Well thats how tournaments or cups work. If you beat everyone you play, then you will win the cup (tournament). It really is irrelevent to cup competitions who your opponent is.

I maybe didnt make that clear.

In the tournament, you already win a cup (the tourney win chalked up to your name)

Its like saying the winner of the FA cup should have 10 points added to thier league score!

That make more sense?

And if all games were ranked, you should get the same points you would in a normal game, regardless of which stage in the tourney you are at.

The two can work together, but are still seperate achievements.

silly idea havin the tournament ranked winner getting 10 or 15 points 4 winning it that would be good but i bet if newbies were on & put u out in 1st round taking 4 points youwould be gutted look @ half the newbies on here they aint new..... bad idea stick 2 points just 4 the winner will be the best way

Surely the whole point would be so that higher ranking players had to play newbies?

And after all, loosing 4 points is better than someone else getting 10! LOL!

Big split on this subject. To me, the idea of only the winner getting points is silly. Thats the one person who doesnt need them as they get the win!!

it seems your the only one who thinks it a bad idea, strange that spinner you never really usually disagree with others on anything.

The idea of ranked games is that YOU choose who you wanna risk your rank against. This could be linked with the multi using policy, because as a lot of newbies are pros, certain people choose not to play newbies. If a tournament was ranked all the way through you WOULD meet a newbie in disguise as a pro at some point. As rangers said (in one massive sentence lol) you will be being conned out of 4 points if your a top rank. Maybe when you get to 800+ rank spinner you will understand this problem.

As far as getting a stat then fair enough, yes, you do get a stat for winning a tourny. But wouldnt it even the rankings table out if you were to get points for winning tournies? i think it would. If your forced to play ranked against someone who you dont wanna then you run the risk of getting a multi user. Its pretty simple spinner

I dont think it would even the rank tables out simply because, is it fair for one user to get from 890 to 900 by winning one tourney, when another may have to win about 20 ranked games?!?

Makes a mockery of the rank system IMO.

Oh, and i will never get to 800 m8! I hate being over 700 because you end up playing number junkies...

I have never been interested in rank because it is very much *just a number* unless everone plays everyone etc.

As for multi-using, i think ranked tourneys would actually HELP this, since the user wants the stats of winning a tourney on thier *main name* they will be forced to play some ranked games against real opponents of varying skill.

I dont think it would even the rank tables out simply because, is it fair for one user to get from 890 to 900 by winning one tourney, when another may have to win about 20 ranked games?!?

Well get to the top of the ranked tables.......just cos someone puts in the time and effort to get to 900 does that mean they dont deserve same as anyone else? your not bothered about rank though are you!

Oh, and i will never get to 800 m8! I hate being over 700 because you end up playing number junkies...

I have never been interested in rank because it is very much *just a number* unless everone plays everyone etc.

I play anyone at all and generally do ok, especially against people like you....if your not bothered about rank and numbers then why are you so bothered about multi users?

Edited at 23:42 Mon 8/05/06 (BST)

As for multi-using, i think ranked tourneys would actually HELP this, since the user wants the stats of winning a tourney on thier *main name* they will be forced to play some ranked games against real opponents of varying skill.

This is utter garbage. as i said i had 3 user names all above 830 rank. I wanted to do the best on all of them. My main name (this one) now is my only user name, i deleted the others. Now i will "be forced" to play "real opponents" i am so scared of losing my rank (not). I was 915 & i went down to 848, i'm now back up to 880. Thats the way the game goes and as most players will tell you they play any1.

You contradict yourself so much spinner its unreal. What exactly is your point? you wanna ban multi users cos they are ruining the game as you dont know who they are then they thrash you (surely taking your points and annoying you). You say you want ranked tournies. But you dont care about stats and rank? man your 1 confused person

Part of the reason i dont particularly care about the rank thing is because the tourneys etc arent ranked.

If all games were ranked it would even more!

Like i said, my argument initially was to make things fairer for genuine players like yourself, so that pro's have the respect they deserve.

But dont forget its just a game eh! LOL