ranking question

ranking question

Postby DavidRis » Mon Sep 29, 2008 4:44 pm

This question, I'm sure has been brought up before, but does anyone think the strat player rankings should be figured differently??

It doest seem fair that someone who has had 200 teams but won say, 15 championships, should be ranked higher than someone who has had 50 teams but has won 25 championships. Now, for sure there should be a certain # needed to be figured with everyone else, (obviously 2 teams with 1 championship isn't the same) but the current way it's figured doesn't seem at all fair. It gives an unfair advantage to players with the $$ for many teams. (in some cases, an unbelievable amount!)

Maybe it would be enough to just rank players by; 25 or less, 50 or less, 100 less, etc..etc..

Just an observation
DavidRis
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm

Postby wavygravy2k » Mon Sep 29, 2008 4:49 pm

I think it was mentioned a some time ago that the ratings are based more on experience so you can get an idea how experienced the manager is.
wavygravy2k
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm

Postby coyote303 » Mon Sep 29, 2008 7:56 pm

I play duplicate bridge where the goal is to win "master points." By accumulating more points, you earn a higher title. (For example, I'm a bronze life master.) Some people disparagingly refer to master points as "participation points" because there is just enough luck in duplicate bridge that everyone can get lucky and win once in a while.

In duplicate bridge, some people clamor for a better way to rank players. However, it's unlikely the system will change because it encourages people to play more. A system such as they have with chess where your rankings can go up and down (and by how much depends on how strong a player you are playing) is definitely a far, far more accurate gauge of skill. However, the system simply doesn't encourage people to play more.

TSN would not be wise to adopt a system that doesn't reward people to play more. And frankly, such a system probably wouldn't be as much fun.

Besides a true rank of skill exists in the TSN system already. They give you the win-loss percentages of each manager. That's what I look at when I am sizing up how good my opposition is!

Coyote
coyote303
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm

Postby DavidRis » Sun Oct 05, 2008 9:49 pm

good points all.

it just bothers me that $$ seems to be such a factor.

:roll:
DavidRis
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm


Return to Strat-O-Matic Baseball Online 20xx

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron