| Topic: Since it was a hot topic last night... |
| ||
|
I was looking at my points since last nights discussion about starting as a Beginner for the first 3 tournaments was such a hot topic and noticed something about my points. When I came in to my first doubles match, I was immediately started as a Rookie. That's fine, I have no problem with that, and correct me if I'm wrong but the problem is when a Beginner breaks 400 points, they get automatically bumped up to 700 points. I'm looking at my doubles history, and when I was put in for the first time, my points started at 400. ( you can see here: http://vancouverfoosball.com/doubles_history.asp?id=364&offset=10) Is that correct? Why do I have to earn those 300 points but players who get bumped up from Beginner don't? Onur |
Posted: Jan 14 2008 11:51AM
| ||
|
Players are put into the median range of a rank after gaining the rank through points. This is done to have them settle into their proper position within the rank by giving everyone an equal starting point. Players who are bumped up a level arbitrarily are usually put near the lower end of the rank so that if their bumping was an error of judgement (player played abnormally above their usual ability) they would drop down a level sooner than if they were in the middle of the rank. I'm not certain that everyone that is bumped "before their points dictate it" start at the same level in the next rank. I think it is decided upon by the person entering the change. Possibly we should dictate that they only start 100 points above the lower level. |
| ||
|
Actually I was looking at the code for the site, and they do get bumped up to 700 every time. Each rank has a minimum point threshhold, and a point bump associated. In this example, any Beginner ranked player that breaks 400 points gets automatically bumped up to 700 points. Here's a few peoples stats to see. http://vancouverfoosball.com/doubles_history.asp?id=263&offset=-1 - On 1/15/2006 you can see he was a 384, earned 23 points to bring him to 407, and automatically got bumped to 700. http://vancouverfoosball.com/doubles_history.asp?id=264&offset=0 - Was at 368, got 50 to put him to 418, got bumped to 700 http://vancouverfoosball.com/doubles_history.asp?id=357&offset=0 - Had 391, earned 28 points, got bumped to 700 http://vancouverfoosball.com/doubles_history.asp?id=208&offset=100 - Had 385, earned 36, bumped to 700 It's pretty much the same thing with everyone. Regardless I just thought I'd point it out after the heated arguements we had last night. Since you weren't there I'll explain what happened. Basically people were argueing that Charlynne should have been ranked a Beginner because it was her first time there for doubles, but then others were saying she was clearly not a beginner as she's able to pass and do a rollover shot. I was able to relate since my first time I went to doubles was right after I got bumped up to Rookie in singles, so they decided to start me as a Rookie in doubles as well. Basically, when you are made a rookie from the get go, you get placed at the minimum point threshhold instead of the regular bumped point score which you would get had you earned the rookie rank from Beginner which hardly seems fair. This applies to every other rank as well, not just beginner/rookie. Basically if you start at any rank, you start at the minimum point threshold rather than the bumped points. In any case, I'll live, I just thought I'd point that out. If anything I will benefit since it just means you guys will have to spot me points for even longer, but then it hurts me since it will take me a lot longer to earn those 300 points which I could have got for free had I been started as a Beginner when I came my first time. Onur |
| ||
|
Actually I think if you play 6-7 tournaments your points should be at the level you deserve regardless of where you start at within a rank. You get more points for the greater the point gap after a victory and lose less points the greater the point gap after a loss. |
| ||
|
I think Onur should get those 300 points for consistency sakes. And yes, Charlynne (sp!) should be a rookie, she blocks like a mofo, and can pass, and shoot a rollover. She has also been to doubles before (long ago...). Dave didn't hear the conversation earlier where we decided that she should be a rookie, and as they say, extra spots are always nice. |
| ||
|
Pete's probably right, the points will level out after some number of tournaments so I'm not too worried about it either way. Chances are if I got those 300 points, I'll lose most of them and drop back down to around where I am now until my game improves. If anything it would help all the higher ranks points out since they would earn more for beating me :P It's still something to consider in the future anyways. Perhaps when I get around to looking at the site code it's something I can fix for when a new player gets added. Onur |
| ||
|
Oh and I was going to add, it's too late to add those points now anyways. All the games I've played since being at 400 would affect every player I've played with and against if I had 300 more points since the point calculator tries to go back and retroactively correct everyones score. We learned that lesson when whoever mistakenly added the first tournament of the year as 2007 :P Onur |
The last post to this thread is more than 30 days old.