What's new

Bank of Perfect Legend: INJ ranking system

You can't fault a ranking system based on players who decide not to our can't make events.

"90% of success is showing up".

MIT, the way the system has rocking so far, I've NEVER been seeded #1 at a major during the entirety of injustice. Never, all due to opinions rather than results.

Sounds like the current "system"needs an overhaul.
I agree, ppl need to stop with the subjectivity and use objectivity. If we just based results overall, screw points. Then you'd for sure be a top seed, king would be a top seed, etc. That'd make so much more sense.
 

Mr Aquaman

Armored Launcher
Administrator
Premium Supporter
the only ranking system that would work perfect for the igau community is the ATP Tennis world ranking system =O

establish rankings for tournaments and points for finishes

Grand Slam (Evo possibly TFC)
1000 masters (Majors)
500's (Annual Regionals)
250's (idk)

something to that affect, that way after a year you have to defend your points, and everyone gets points no matter how they finish, every win counts. Just a thought. Might be a bad one idk.
 

A F0xy Grampa

Problem X Promotions
Do players even care if they're correctly seeded or not? I swear all this would be for is props.

Bracket organisation only matters when you have major issues such as 2 of the 4 UK players being put in the same pool as eachother at EVO *cough cough*
Don't mix regions/countries when its an out of towner event.
 
Do players even care if they're correctly seeded or not? I swear all this would be for is props.

Bracket organisation only matters when you have major issues such as 2 of the 4 UK players being put in the same pool as eachother at EVO *cough cough*
Don't mix regions/countries when its an out of towner event.
hmm, I mean at TFC, DJT and KDZ were in the same pool...... I dnt think that has ever happened in a fighting game where a major a few months from evo, first and second at evo are in the same pool lol. It does create hype for sure, but I feel they should have some kind of seeding.
 

CrimsonShadow

Administrator and Community Engineer
Administrator
You can't fault a ranking system based on players who decide not to our can't make events.

"90% of success is showing up".
Of course. However, as someone who is constantly involved in trying to help get people out to events, I'm also realistic about people's situations.

This is very easy to say when you live a 1-13 hour carpool drive or bus ride away from ECT, WB, NEC, Summer Jam, TFC, Kumite, APEX, DTN, UFGT and FR rather than a 6 hour flight. The farthest EC event for people where you and I live is CEO, which is still just a day's drive.

On the West Coast, the only events people care about that are in driving distance are SCR and EVO. And with the disappearance of UFGT, the next closest major will require people to go all the way over to Tennessee.

If the dream is to ask a west coast TO to use a system to seed their tournaments that is supported by a 7-8 event ease of travel disparity, you will politely receive a very large "FU" -- and I know this from the experience of having to deal with it in the FGC.

Everyone should consider how many tournaments in 1 year that they've actually flown to+back from on their own dime. Remember what happened at TFC.. Sometimes travel is easier said than done.
 
Last edited:

KH_Captain

Nightwolf wannabe
I would like to see everything matter
Top 8 local 1 pt.
Win local 2 pts.

Top 8 regional 2 pts
Win regional 5 pts

Top 16 major 2 pts
Top 8 major 5 pts
Win major 10 pts

Top 32 evo 2 pts
Top 16 evo 5 pts
Top 8 evo 10 pts
Win evo 25 pts

Then as a community we have to decide what nbr of entrants constitutes regional or major like say anything over 45 entrants is a major. 30-45 regional. Then once the seeding is in place you could do must have so many top 20 seeds to b major.

Then i think this could work and as a community we could do seeding. Its really not as difficult as it seems. People just have to comprimise.
 

KDZ

It's amore, BABY.
With the tennis system there are points you defend each year, the next time you go to that event. If you get the same placing you retain the points. If you do better you gain, if you do worse you lose some based on how badly you did.

But you've earned those points for a year.
 

Mr Aquaman

Armored Launcher
Administrator
Premium Supporter
With the tennis system there are points you defend each year, the next time you go to that event. If you get the same placing you retain the points. If you do better you gain, if you do worse you lose some based on how badly you did.

But you've earned those points for a year.
yup, for example my free ass, id actually be decently ranked right now, now come civil war VI, i do terribly, i lose alot of points, now im where i belong, pretty damn balanced :] keeps the top up to date year by year and awards the best and consistency.
 

chemist4hire

I Got Guiled
But if you're going to pay $200 for a ranking system and have to maintain it, you might want to take your time and evaluate the situation (and various ranking systems) first :)

Personally I don't think anybody should recommend or endorse anything without taking the time to do their homework.
As a chemist, doing your due diligence in research of various reaction conditions for a transformation is quite important. But if you do all the literature searches for past precedence and never set up the experiment, you never move forward.

At the end of day you can argue the pros and cons of any system on paper, but if you don't actually implement one, you will never gather the data you need to move toward a better solution.

You are taking to long to do your homework. Set a deadline for a system (preferably before the next major), and pick one by then. See how it works and then attempt to correct errors in the system.
 

CrimsonShadow

Administrator and Community Engineer
Administrator
As a chemist, doing your due diligence in research of various reaction conditions for a transformation is quite important. But if you do all the literature searches for past precedence and never set up the experiment, you never move forward.

At the end of day you can argue the pros and cons of any system on paper, but if you don't actually implement one, you will never gather the data you need to move toward a better solution.

You are taking to long to do your homework. Set a deadline for a system (preferably before the next major), and pick one by then. See how it works and then attempt to correct errors in the system.
Taking too long? I've already implemented a results-based ranking system for FGC events, based on a good deal of homework. I feel like you direct statements at a lot of people here before you know who they are or what they've done.
 

KDZ

It's amore, BABY.
Just implement the system!

If it doesn't work we can move on from there, but this is a relatively easy thing to try and do.
 
I would like to see everything matter
Top 8 local 1 pt.
Win local 2 pts.

Top 8 regional 2 pts
Win regional 5 pts

Top 16 major 2 pts
Top 8 major 5 pts
Win major 10 pts

Top 32 evo 2 pts
Top 16 evo 5 pts
Top 8 evo 10 pts
Win evo 25 pts

Then as a community we have to decide what nbr of entrants constitutes regional or major like say anything over 45 entrants is a major. 30-45 regional. Then once the seeding is in place you could do must have so many top 20 seeds to b major.

Then i think this could work and as a community we could do seeding. Its really not as difficult as it seems. People just have to comprimise.
I think the logistics of keeping track of locals is too difficult and there would probably be too many arguments about the weight/value of them.

@CrimsonShadow what happened to that ranking website you put together for MK and Injustice about a year ago?
 
Last edited:

Jaxel

8WAYRUN.TV (home of The Break stream)
Administrator
the only ranking system that would work perfect for the igau community is the ATP Tennis world ranking system =O

establish rankings for tournaments and points for finishes

Grand Slam (Evo possibly TFC)
1000 masters (Majors)
500's (Annual Regionals)
250's (idk)

something to that affect, that way after a year you have to defend your points, and everyone gets points no matter how they finish, every win counts. Just a thought. Might be a bad one idk.
My ranking system is based on the ATP Tennis World Ranking system... even though we slightly changed it on 8WAYRUN... though Smashboards uses it more as a pure ATP system.
 

Jaxel

8WAYRUN.TV (home of The Break stream)
Administrator
The way we have it set up at 8WAYRUN is as follows:

For every ONE player who enters a tournament, that tournament is worth 150 points; so with 10 people at an event, that event is worth 1500 points. However, events are categorized and each category is worth a maximum number of points, no matter how many people who enter it (this helps fight against random locals that randomly get 50 people, even though no one who is "good" is there; it fights against local tournaments running the system).

Majors: 5000 points (max: 33.3)
Monthlies: 4000 (max: 26.6)
Weeklies: 3000 (max: 20)

Points are awarded in the following distrubition:
  • 1 - 100% of the point pool (so if an event is worth 5000 points, they get 5000 points)
  • 2 - 87.5
  • 3 - 75
  • 4 - 62.5
  • 5 - 50
  • 7 - 37.5
  • 9 - 25
  • 13 - 12.5
  • 999 - 1 (everyone who competes gets 1% participation points)
After points are awarded for each individual event, a player's final total score is NOT the combined total of ALL their scores. Its instead the combined total of their TOP 5 scores within the past TWELVE months. This has the advantage of putting more weight on majors, since eventually, if someone attends more events, and does well at majors, their scores at weeklies will get weeded out. It also has the advantage of not artificially promoting people who simply attend more tournaments than everyone else. And of course, it automatically stales out old players who haven't attended an event in 12 months.

All the settings in this ranking system are modular. So if you want to make it more ATP (where certain events are worth a flat amount, instead of being calculated using the number of entrants, you can do that).