Official TYM MK9 Rankings List

[Juggs]

We need our own list. I'm not suggesting that the other list is bad, I just would like to have a list based on how the community thinks the list should be devised. This will only be based on numbers. Meaning no bias will be factored in, and the only thing that will matter is the tournaments and placing.

I think the point system should be based on a few factors.

1. The number of entrants into the tournament
2. The number of high quality players in the tournament
3. The prestige level of the tournament (Final Round, MLG, EVO, etc)
4. The location of the tournament

Allow me to explain #4. To avoid certain regions having an advantage if they have more majors in their region, that will be factored into the points. There will be set points for each Major. For instance, no matter about #1-#2, there will be a set number of points based on #3-#4. So just because your major receives a little less points than another, #1-#2 can make it to where "your" major will give you more points than another.

As far as the math goes, I can work something up but any help is greatly appreciated. Not only with the math though, this isn't a set thing. I want the communities feedback and what they think would make a good list. It doesn't have to be based only on the 4 things listed above or even any of them.

 

[Tim Static]

Give points to Top finishers (8 or 16), almost like Evo qualifiers, do it Mario Kart style lol.

 

[Juggs]

Let's stick to the topic. This isn't about Tom Brady.

 

[Juggs]

I thought people wanted this and welcomed the idea when I first proposed it? Is there no interest anymore?

 

[DownfouralitY]

I thought people wanted this and welcomed the idea when I first proposed it? Is there no interest anymore?

qft!

 

[Tolkeen]

I'm interested in this, but seeing as I do not attend, nor place in very many (any lol) tournaments I feel that my opinion is not necessarily wanted or appreciated. I would say just make the list, and then we'll see if people pay attention to it or not.

 

[Big D]

I dont see why we shouldn't do this list. It couldn't hurt to have our own, and the rules for the list seem solid to me.

 

[AREZ God of War]

Official TYM MK9 Rankings List



#1 NY and Philly lol
#2 the rest

 

[Enigma642]

I can't speak to how the system should work but I do agree it would be nice to have our own list here on TYM.

 

[NRF CharlieMurphy]

I would do this.
Each Evo Major tournament is given a base total point. regardless of size. Lets say... 600?
Every NFG ranked player carries an extra point total with them to a tourney. that is also a base number for top 10 and a base number for 11-20. 1-10 get 20 a piece, 11-20 get 10 a piece.

Winner gets the total output. Mario Kart style down to top 16 (if large) or top 8 (if small).

Seed NFG players based on rank. Simple.... easy peasy lemon squeezy.

 

[REO]

All majors being worth the same amount of points is retarded. Major 1 has 30 top players at it and over 200 entrants while Major 2 has 50 players at it and 2 top players at it yet they're both worth the same? Get out of here.

Having top 16 gets points is pointless because it's the same flawed logic as having top 8 receive points. Players who constantly get 17th place 5 majors in a row will suddenly be overshadowed by a guy who placed 16th once and got last place every other major. Either give everyone points for entering a major or just top 8. If this isn't fair to you then step your game up and work on getting top 8 instead of complaining about it.

Payers should be seeded on skill by their current tournament showings. Not for the character they use, not for what they did 8 months ago, etc. This is a CURRENT ranking list, not a hall of fame. Keep it that way. Points from majors should diminish after 5-6 months, anything longer than that is overkill.

 

[Juggs]

Thanks for the responses, lol. Keep 'em coming!

All majors being worth the same amount of points is retarded. Major 1 has 30 top players at it and over 200 entrants while Major 2 has 50 players at it and 2 top players at it yet they're both worth the same? Get out of here.

Having top 16 gets points is pointless because it's the same flawed logic as having top 8 receive points. Players who constantly get 17th place 5 majors in a row will suddenly be overshadowed by a guy who placed 16th once and got last place every other major. Either give everyone points for entering a major or just top 8. If this isn't fair to you then step your game up and work on getting top 8 instead of complaining about it.

Payers should be seeded on skill by their current tournament showings. Not for the character they use, not for what they did 8 months ago, etc. This is a CURRENT ranking list, not a hall of fame. Keep it that way. Points from majors should diminish after 5-6 months, anything longer than that is overkill.

Is that how the NFG works or something? Because I definitely didn't say all majors should be the same amount of points, I actually said just the opposite.

 

[GGA Jeremiah]

Actually is there anywhere on test your might that lists all of the Major Tournaments we have had and the places? That would be awesome to take a look at.

 

[Death]

I do think majors longer than 6 monthes ago is pointless to when it comes as now. As REO said the most updated and current list is better than a hall of fame of people that used to place well but dont anymore.

 

[Big D]

Death and REO make good points...if we do actually make this list we gotta change around that point system.

 

[Juggs]

The list removing points after a certain period is great imo. This makes it current and rewards people who put in the effort into making it to tournaments. Sure, you getting top 8 at a major 6 months ago is an awesome achievement, but the purpose of the ranking system is to reward the current top 20 players, not the top 20 players of all time.

 

[LEGEND]

someone should make a thread where we all put our tournament placings so they can be tallied up

gimme my 10 points ; ]

 

[16 Bit]

You can find all the old results on event hubs. I'd do it but I'm too lazy lol

Off the top of my head the majors in order have been...

PowerUp
PDP
UFGT
Revelations
CEO
NCR
ECT
EVO
Summer Jam
Devastation
Season's Beatings
NEC
SCR
Winter Brawl
Final Round
MLG

 

[GGA Jeremiah]

You can find all the old results on event hubs. I'd do it but I'm too lazy lol

Off the top of my head the majors in order have been...

PowerUp
PDP
UFGT
Revelations
CEO
NCR
ECT
EVO
Summer Jam
Devastation
Season's Beatings
NEC
SCR
Winter Brawl
Final Round
MLG

I actually might be a loser and work on this... hmm I am intrigued.

 

[Mr. Mileena]

dont forget texas showdown which is happening next friday

 

[REDRUM]

Not sure anyone is going to find a point system that is "less" controversial than the NFG's


What I do think the TYM Rankings System should be is just a pure system based on the communities opinion of who the Top 30 or so players are via a voting system. I know it becomes a popularity contest to a certain degree but a flawless system is impossible...

 

[Juggs]

Every documented tournament should be taken into account. This avoids the decision of whether a tournament should be included or not. To make it where locals and majors are different, is really simple using the right math. Majors will award you more points than locals. Like I said in the first post. Each tournament will have a pre-conceived number of points.

For instance, EVO will automatically be 1000 points. This doesn't mean 1000 points is the only points that are taken into account. The number of entrants and level of competition will also be taken into account. So another major, such as an MLG tournament, can very well garner you more points than EVO. MLG tournaments will be 900 points. But like I stated, it depends on the number of entrants and level of competition. So MLG could end up with a 2000 point total in the end and EVO could only end up with a 1500 point total.

Those numbers aren't set in stone, btw. Just an example.

 

[Flagg]

Juggernaut, I know this will look like a massive wall of text, but something like this could work for MK:

http://www.tennis28.com/rankings/systems.html

I think everything from PU 2011 to now should be included, and perhaps some tournies from outside the States. I think only players that have entered tournies should be included in the list. I'd say about 250 people from TYM have probably been in a tournie if only once.

If that seems daunting, perhaps just the top 50 should be taken into consideration.

 

[Juggs]

Juggernaut, I know this will look like a massive wall of text, but something like this could work for MK:

http://www.tennis28.com/rankings/systems.html

I think everything from PU 2011 to now should be included, and perhaps some tournies from outside the States. I think only players that have entered tournies should be included in the list. I'd say about 250 people from TYM have probably been in a tournie if only once.

If that seems daunting, perhaps just the top 50 should be taken into consideration.

No, there should be a 6 month cut off as suggested. Why? Because it rewards the more active players. Of course, this also rewards the able players. Which means sponsored players will always have a better chance to be on the list. However, measures will be taken so that certain regions with more tournaments won't be dominant.

 

[Flagg]

No, there should be a 6 month cut off as suggested. Why? Because it rewards the more active players. Of course, this also rewards the able players. Which means sponsored players will always have a better chance to be on the list. However, measures will be taken so that certain regions with more tournaments won't be dominant.

Hmm, agreed. Six months would be easier to tally up. Question then is, which tournaments are being included? And should tournies that have happened in South America and EU be included (which I think they should).

There was that one in Argentina with something ridiculous like 120 players? And then there was the huge EU tournie in France.