Main Forum
| Post Reply
|
Suggestion For Ladder
|
|
Play gin-rummy tournaments online
|
| It's now: Oct 13, 5:18am EST |
Suggestion For Ladder
Posted by
doowopdj
(VIP) 10 Sep 2004 1:27pm
I find the current system of Ladder sort of lack of risk for a Challenger.
For example if #8 challenges #1 and #8 loses, he/she still remains #8. However if #8 wins then he/she is bumped up to ladder rung#4.
All the risk on a Challenge is with the higher ranked player.
Suggestion!!
If a Challenger loses the challenged game, they should be dropped one rung down on the Ladder.
At least this way the Challenger has some sort of risk.
Challenger rank upon completion of the challenge
Posted by
webmaster
10 Sep 2004 1:54pm
Thanks for the idea. The goal of a challenge is to get a lower rated player an opportunity to move up the ladder. Players already high up on the ladder have to fight hard to stay on the top.
If a challenger has potential penalty of dropping even lower on the ladder after the challenge, what will make him issue a challenge in the first place?
webmaster
Challenger rank upon completion of the challenge
Posted by
doowopdj
(VIP) 10 Sep 2004 2:27pm
We are talking Challenges here. Not regular mainroom Ladder Games. Since Challenges can only be issured by Top 20 players, the Challenger should therefore be GOOD enough.
If a player is in the Top 20 and issues a challenge and loses, then that Challenger should lose a rung on the ladder. EG: Ladder#20 issues challenge to Ladder#1 and wins. Ladder#20 in now Ladder#10. If Ladder#20 loses then he/she should drop to Ladder#21.
Your theory that there is no incentive for a lower ranked Ladder position to challenge under my scenario, holds NO WATER.
Let the Challenger (Ladder#'S 1-20)take some risk.
Kinda but not really
Posted by
(VIP) 10 Sep 2004 2:51pm
I understand what you are saying but you can also view it as the higher player has no risk at all in every case other then a challenge by a player who is directly below him.So you could also argue that higher ranking player has nothing to lose either.What would be nice is to see the higher ranked player get some sort of advantage when it came to tourneys in the way of a bye when it needed.It would also be nice to see a torney or two where you are paired based on your ranking like for instance the college basketball NCAA Bracket format.Dj I see you make this comment when you are # 1 and # 2 is chaseing you all around the room (He! He!) Kidding D.J. but seriously the only real solution is JUST WIN BABY and you have no risks!!
Suggestions for the LADDER....
Posted by
Ed_Blue
(VIP) 10 Sep 2004 9:04pm
The only variable that neither of my dear friends discussed is the impact of tourney play. If #1 plays #2 all the time, which just happened a month or so ago, it leaves no room to knock either player out of their positions since they keep swapping. The result of this is a very low rated player finishing in the top 5. There is nothing wrong with this but most of the matches at the TOP stay there.
My suggestion, and it may work, give the winner of any sanctioned tourney a bigger LADDER INCENTIVE. Instead of the one-place Lader jump give him/her 5 places on the LADDER and it also may be wise to give the 2nd place finisher 3 places on the LADDER.
This would improve the chances of the better players being competitive on the ladder.
OOPS, I've tangled with both DooWop and Iam and they are both great players and should be on top of the ladder.
Come to think about it, with all the 1st and 2nd place finishes I've had in tourney play I would be well above the #1 spot.
Just kidding.....but the suggestion is probably the most valid one yet.
What do you think?
HERE'S WHAT I THINK!
Posted by
(VIP) 11 Sep 2004 11:43am
WHO CARES?
TY & GL
Off The Topic
Posted by
doowopdj
(VIP) 11 Sep 2004 3:36pm
Somehow you have gotten away from the original post.
All I suggested was if a Top 20 position ladder challenged another Top 20 position ladder and lost. The Challenger should drop a rung. As it stands now, Challengers have NO risk to their standings by Challenging a higher ranked Ladder.
DJ......
Posted by
Ed_Blue
(VIP) 11 Sep 2004 7:55pm
The topic has not gone astray. The issue, your issue, is 'risk/reward'.
I fully agree with you but there are many more issues with the Ladder than the loser being at risk. My point is that the reward side should be beefed up as well as the loss.
I do believe we are both on the same track
why fix it, when it isn’t broken?
Posted by
12 Sep 2004 5:13am
The real topic is “why fix it, when it isn’t broken?” All the players except for the #1 player are already at risk of losing their position, even when inactive, by the other players jumping over them. Even that has been corrected by resetting the stats once a month or whenever, making it a very dynamic ladder.
Doowopdj,I don't see the risk with the higher ranked player. If the #8 you mentioned wins, the #1 remains #1, so actually neither player is at any great risk.
I see the ‘challenge’ thingy as a way to make the top 10 players accept a game they may otherwise refuse, and so preventing them from playing only one player and just swapp places.
The only issue with this ladder is that the tourneys are restricted to only one group of players, thus excluding many high rated players that may want to participate in it.
Reply to this topic
|
Play gin-rummy tournaments online
At GameColony.com you can play games of skill only -- play for free or play for $prizes!.
According to the statutes of most states in the United States, gambling is defined as: "risking something of value upon the outcome of a contest of chance". (Also see No Gambling!). The skill (as opposed to chance) is predominant in games of skill. Playing games of skill for $prizes, therefore, has nothing to do with gambling as it is not a contest of chance -- the more skillful player will win far more often. The chance element of a 'gamble' is either insignificant or missing. When players compete in tournaments or games of skill for $prizes -- it is "competitive entertainment" rather then "gambling". The more skilled winner will always win more matches, tournaments and $prizes.
|
|
