Bank of Perfect Legend: INJ ranking system

[MortySeinfeld]

Dude your WC players, all the ones relevantly "winning majors" have either WNF, which guarantees them points of some kind, or have 5 tournaments under their belt. All of which serves to have them correctly places at majors, with strong seeding.

Your starting to sound irrational here.

I think the reality of the whole thing is that there needs to be a mutual understanding that most major tournaments in the FGC are on the East Coast (that is not the fault of the players or the system).

The only legitimate solution to this problem would be for the FGC as a whole to strike a balance on the location of majors for geographic location respectively.

Example:

- 3x West Coast Majors
- 3x Midwest Majors
- 3x East Coast Majors
- Evo/Superbowl

Obviously that is out of the players control, so it is irrelevant.

Regardless of which system is selected (IMO Jaxel's looks good to me), I think there is always going to be this perception that it favors a group of people that have more opportunities accessible to them. In the grand scheme of things, it is out of our hands.

Another possibility would be to have a ladder system that ranks the overall community, then also include ladders that can be organized by region (Who is the best in the West Coast/Midwest/East Coast/etc.).

 

[YOMI MITYEAP]

@AK Pig Of The Hut, starting locals in vegas isn't as easy as you think. A lot of the times, ppl won't even stick with an NRS game in vegas. (MK9 a good example of that). Also I already said screw points and just post results from majors for seeding (locals wins are by no means meaningless, but it'd make things easier because locals happen a lot more often than majors). I could care less if someone from the east got better seeding because in reality, seeding is no guarantee of getting top 8 or even out of pools.

 

[MortySeinfeld]

@CrimsonShadow @KDZ

How about you set a limit for locals/regionals that can count within a specific time period?

Also No one is stopping AZ/Vegas/Norcal from starting locals

Ironically enough, we might start something up again very soon here.

 

[MortySeinfeld]

@Jaxel Does your system have the ability to sort information based on specific criteria?

It would be nice to have a comprehensive list/ranking of players based on the following information:

- Overall total (Including Evo, Majors, Regionals, Locals)
- Overall total (only including Evo, Majors)
- Regional Total (separated by West Coast/Midwest/East Coast) (Including Evo, Majors, Regionals, Locals)
- Regional Total (separated by West Coast/Midwest/East Coast) (Including only Evo, Majors)

Or even a filter that allows you to turn on/off specific 'tiers' of tournaments from being included in the totals.

Tier's being:

- Evo
- Majors
- Regionals
- Locals

If we are including tournaments all the way down to the scope of local tournaments, I can see a need for there to be a 'governing body/group' of people that determine which local tournaments are accepted, or even an area/format where legitimate results are posted (ie: Challonge brackets). Locals should have a flat rate/value system or be based on (X) number of entrants.

I am sure this would require a lot of work, and there would probably need to be new fields of information that would need to be captured in order for the information to be accurate. But I think if we had a ladder/league system that was sortable in several different ways, it would probably address a lot of the questions/complaints from people and would be objectively accurate.

 

[KDZ]

IMO anything pre 1.06 was a different game.

IMO basketball pre 2001 was a different game, Jordans wins dont matter.

IMO tennis was a different game before 2003, all of Agassi and Sampras' wins dont count.

IMO baseball was a different game before 2008, frausd ass Yankees.

 

[YOMI MITYEAP]

IMO basketball pre 2001 was a different game, Jordans wins dont matter.

IMO tennis was a different game before 2003, all of Agassi and Sampras' wins dont count.

IMO baseball was a different game before 2008, frausd ass Yankees.

why can't we just count wins pre patch? the game has A LOT of tournaments ahead of it, we should count everything to make an accurate system representing the results of every tournament. Vanilla SF vs different and of course mvc3 was different from umvc3. counting pre patch would be better in my opinion.

 

[Pig Of The Hut]

IMO basketball pre 2001 was a different game, Jordans wins dont matter.

IMO tennis was a different game before 2003, all of Agassi and Sampras' wins dont count.

IMO baseball was a different game before 2008, frausd ass Yankees.

You've switched me on this

U got me where it makes sense

Sports

 

[Kinetic Demise]

IMO basketball pre 2001 was a different game, Jordans wins dont matter.

IMO tennis was a different game before 2003, all of Agassi and Sampras' wins dont count.

IMO baseball was a different game before 2008, frausd ass Yankees.

Jordan will always matter.

 

[VenomX-90]

LBSH to be "Perfect" in every match you should have flawless victories, no losses on you record, be in first place in every tourney etc. or else that "Perfect" name is just BS. Just saying. You cant be "Perfect" if you lose.

 

[SonicBoomBrad]

IMO basketball pre 2001 was a different game, Jordans wins dont matter.

IMO tennis was a different game before 2003, all of Agassi and Sampras' wins dont count.

IMO baseball was a different game before 2008, frausd ass Yankees.

Fair enough. I'm not trying to discredit anyone. You've obviously shown you're just as good post patch. But it was a really different game.

 

[Jaxel]

Except that the way it works actually does the opposite, by allowing people with easy access to tournaments plenty of chances to superceed their 'bad' tournaments in the ratings.

Your problems with the ATP system is based on the numbers we use at 8WR. You can always use different numbers here on TYM, because your community is different. You may wish to make weeklies max out at 2000 points instead of 3000; because your community has more relevant and player filled weeklies. The Soulcalibur community DOES NOT have that, and we WANT people to put more value on weeklies, so we have weighted them accordingly.

As I said, you can have the settings however you want. Smashboards has majors worth 200 points, and weeklies worth 50 points.

If you want, you could also set values to stale at 6 months, instead of 12... or limit it to 10 events, instead of 5.

 

[Jaxel]

@Jaxel Does your system have the ability to sort information based on specific criteria?

You can SORT by specific information, but it wont give rankings by specific information by default.

Rankings have to be rebuilt, and its a math intensive process. So if you want to have rankings based on specific criteria, you could do it very easily with sub-leagues.

 

[CrimsonShadow]

Your problems with the ATP system is based on the numbers we use at 8WR. You can always use different numbers here on TYM, because your community is different. You may wish to make weeklies max out at 2000 points instead of 3000; because your community has more relevant and player filled weeklies. The Soulcalibur community DOES NOT have that, and we WANT people to put more value on weeklies, so we have weighted them accordingly.

As I said, you can have the settings however you want. Smashboards has majors worth 200 points, and weeklies worth 50 points.

If you want, you could also set values to stale at 6 months, instead of 12... or limit it to 10 events, instead of 5.

If you read the rest of the post, I go through why it's not just the initial numbers that matter here, and what the major issues are with ATP in general in a community like ours.

I also covered why it works well in certain situations.

The reason ATP works well in tennis has to do with the grand slam + masters series format with mandatory events, and the flexibilty of athletes to travel due to the money involved. The reason they penalize people heavily for missing mandatory events without injury or allowable exception is that the validity of the system depends on the consistency of the events and the players' travel.

Our community is much closer to something like the USCF.

 

[SaJa]

 

[Jaxel]

The reason ATP works well in tennis has to do with the grand slam + masters series format with mandatory events, and the flexibilty of athletes to travel due to the money involved. The reason they penalize people heavily for missing mandatory events without injury or allowable exception is that the validity of the system depends on the consistency of the events and the players' travel.

Our community is much closer to something like the USCF.

So your complaint is that the system BENEFITS people who can travel to more majors, and HURTS people who don't?

What the problem here? Isn't that how ALL ranking systems work? If you don't go to tournaments, then you don't get ranked.

 

[CrimsonShadow]

So your complaint is that the system BENEFITS people who can travel to more majors, and HURTS people who don't?

There's no system that works in your favor if you don't attend anything. However, because this system has little benefit for consistency, it's slanted far more in the favor of people who live near a ton of events.

Yes you can raise the cap -- and if you thought about it, that doesn't fix the problem at all. Let's say it's set at 10 events; well who is going to be able to make 10 events of major/regional size? Players in the Northeast.

You can dress it up any way you want, but it doesn't fix the underlying problem. ATP isn't meant for a community like ours. It works great in tennis because people have the resources to travel, travel a lot (either because they're trying to qualify/earn money, or they're a top player and mandated to make events), and the rules help enforce the consistency of the big events.

Trying to fit a square peg into a round hole to benefit a select few is not going to get anyone what they want from this, and there are more fitting options. We are a USCF-style community.

 

[Jaxel]

There's no system that works in your favor of you don't attend anything. However, because this system has little benefit for consistency, it's slanted far more in the favor of people who live near a ton if events.

Yes you can raise the cap -- and if you thought about it, that doesn't fix the problem at all. Let's say it's set at 10 events; well who is going to be able to make 10 events of major/regional size? Players in the Northeast.

Again... whats the problem here? The top players travel; even if their region doesn't have the most events... And consequently, regions with more events breed more top players.

The idea of a "top player" coming out of an area that has no local events is SOOOOOOOO rare that whenever it does happen, you hear about it; because its an anomoly, an outlier (outliers are pieces of data to be IGNORED in any statistical calculation). And at most, its ONE player; meanwhile a region with lots of events could have 20 top players. You're going to PENALIZE those 20 top players because they live in a region that has more events?

 

[ForeverKing]

You are all fools. I'm going to crush you and throw you into the wind hahaha.

That's a cool signature

 

[CrimsonShadow]

Again... whats the problem here? The top players travel; even if their region doesn't have the most events... And consequently, regions with more events breed more top players.

This is categorically false in our community. There are top players everywhere. NorCal, SoCal, Vegas, Atl, Chicago, MD etc... A lot of these areas have 1-2 big events at most. The vast majority of top players in this game don't have near the amount of events to attend as a select few in the NY/NJ general area.

Trying to force a sale by stating things that are completely incorrect doesn't make any sense. If anything you're 'penalizing' the majority of top players, who live outside the NorthEast.

 

[YOMI MITYEAP]

This ranking system argument aint getting anywhere, I already said that I and I'm sure others won't care if someone gets seeded higher since they were able to go to more events, it won't change how a tournament plays out. So if implementing a tennis ranking system does this, so be it. Being a bracket buster is tight

 

[Tom Brady]

There should be no ranking system. TYM wants rankings not to seed or GIVE props, but to TAKE props. When someone does well ppl wanna say "look bitch, you are rank 33 so hold that shit".

I have seen new players come to their first or second event and place top 8.. The response from many ppl? "ohh so this guy does something ONCE and now he's good?"... A ranking system would only allow the thousands of idiots here to further rub someones nose in the fact that they need to do more, that their one tourney may be a fluke.

People also like a ranking system so that when they get outperformed and miss top 8, they can still take credit from those that did deliver by rubbing their nose in the rankings.

We dont need a ranking system. If someone is believed to be a bad player and they level up and win a major with MANY top players, they should be encouraged to continue growing rather then some idiots reminding them that "you cant be ranked high from just this ONE HUUUUUUGGGGGGEEEEE win".. Last thing someone should hear after winning a major or stacked regional is that their rank is still low.

90% of the players here just want a ranking for negative reasons... Can this place have any bigger pool of assholes in it? This place may actually be S++ tier when it comes to most superficial communities.

 

[DarthArma]

guys, I figured out a solution, Just ask me who is the best.....

"Hey Dartharma, who's the best??"




Akuma, my ad blocker said so

 

[Big Pampering]

If you want to make a ranking system for the purpose of seeding, then I suggest there just be 3 ranks:

- the highest seed are the people who have won majors, or conistently place top 4.
- The second highest would be people who consistently get top 8
- and then people who have gotten top 8 a few times

 

[astronout]

Just rank players based on their True Skill on Xbox Live.
That should take care of all of these issues.

 

[G4S KT]

Rankings are dumb, keep that shit to online play where it belongs