| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Fishgle
United States2174 Posts
If some no name suddenly started winning every online tournament against the world's top players, but couldn't go to GSL qualifier or any major tourney's i'd be fine with him being ranked highly in ELO, as long as he was consistently winning his matches. However, I do believe that a bo7 should be weighted more than 7 single games, since it takes more skill to beat the same player using different builds on multiple maps etc. not to mention fatigue and metagaming in such instances. | ||
|
Corrik
United States1416 Posts
Say you win a KOTH. You get a +.00005 bonus to your ranking. If you win a MLG. You get a +.001 bonus to your ranking. If you win GSL Code S. You get a +.05 bonus to your ranking. Or something like that. Give set bonus points to winning certain events... determine which events should give which points. Then the points gained via the tournament wins would go into the rating used to determine your final ranking. Such as... (Base Ranking + modifier points)*Rank Adjustment. (not sure on the exact formula you use already). Thus, you get the normal rating differences for winning versus certain people, but you also get those bonuses also. So if you have generally the same W/L ratio as a similar player but you are a 3 time GSL Code S champion and they never have won one... you would eek ahead based upon GSL championships. | ||
|
theBizness
United States696 Posts
On September 04 2011 17:57 Fishgle wrote: The only thing that should matter is your win loss and the win loss of your opponent. Where you play, and for how much money shouldn't matter. If some no name suddenly started winning every online tournament against the world's top players, but couldn't go to GSL qualifier or any major tourney's i'd be fine with him being ranked highly in ELO, as long as he was consistently winning his matches. However, I do believe that a bo7 should be weighted more than 7 single games, since it takes more skill to beat the same player using different builds on multiple maps etc. not to mention fatigue and metagaming in such instances. Is it the same beating someone in some random online weekly vs in a GSL finals? The situation does matter to a certain degree. | ||
|
Fishgle
United States2174 Posts
On September 04 2011 17:48 J.E.G. wrote: bigger tourny's bring better players. If you are beating better players, you should get more points. Yes, the system already gives you more points for beating a better player. What he is asking is if player X beats player Y in a big tourney, should he get more points than if the exact same games were played on some random online tourney? | ||
|
gozima
Canada602 Posts
I'd go even further than that and weigh offline tourneys much more heavily than any online tournament. | ||
|
MrBitter
United States2940 Posts
North America: MLG IPL NASL (TSL is certainly a huge foreigner event, but they are just so seldom that I don't think they can be included in something like this) EU: IEM Dreamhack Korea: GSL Code S GSL Code A But I truly believe there needs to be a separation between Korea and the West in terms of rankings. Right now, while a few foreign players are close to "Korea level" nobody outside of Korea is realistically capable of taking down a top Korean in a best of X. Maybe its unfair, maybe its bias, but there's a huge gap between top foreigners and top Koreans, and a much, much larger gap between your generic "high level" foreigner and "high level" Koreans. edit: And to be clear, I think rating players like this is fucking brilliant. Incredible initiative and I hope more people pay attention to it. | ||
|
Fishgle
United States2174 Posts
On September 04 2011 18:01 theBizness wrote: Is it the same beating someone in some random online weekly vs in a GSL finals? The situation does matter to a certain degree. I think it shouldn't, as a player should be trying his hardest in any tournament he/she signs up for. This would give players more incentive to play in small weekly cups, and at the same time give the cups more legitimacy since they'll be worth more. Yes, it may seem like GSL is more important, but if MVP beats Nestea in every bo7 they play, and then in the one televised bo7 they play, Nestea wins, who should be considered the better player? In my eyes, the one that is consistent. (MVP, in my hypothetical example) | ||
|
theBizness
United States696 Posts
On September 04 2011 18:07 Fishgle wrote: I think it shouldn't, as a player should be trying his hardest in any tournament he/she signs up for. This would give players more incentive to play in small weekly cups, and at the same time give the cups more legitimacy since they'll be worth more. Yes, it may seem like GSL is more important, but if MVP beats Nestea in every bo7 they play, and then in the one televised bo7 they play, Nestea wins, who should be considered the better player? In my eyes, the one that is consistent. (MVP, in my hypothetical example) People respond differently to pressure, and the pressure of a random weekly is not nearly the same as a GSL. If someone wins all the small ones but chokes on the big stage, that should count against him to a certain degree. Losing on the big stage doesn't invalidate his other wins but it is arguably a bigger deal. | ||
|
Drake
Germany6146 Posts
| ||
|
Khaldor
Germany861 Posts
The question is rather if tournaments like MGL and GSL should give the participating players and additional bonus if they are able to perform well. One could for example say that this would only apply to the final grid (excluding the group stage) and only regard tournaments that have at least xx.xxx prizemoney. | ||
|
Kiyo.
United States2284 Posts
On September 05 2011 01:39 Khaldor wrote: you have to keep in mind, that people who only win small tournaments will most certainly only play agains medium skilled players and therefore have a hard time to accumulate ranking points. The ranking already takes the skilllevels of the players into consideration which is why a player winning MLG for example will already gain a lot of points in the process as he has to defeat a lot of high skilled players. The question is rather if tournaments like MGL and GSL should give the participating players and additional bonus if they are able to perform well. One could for example say that this would only apply to the final grid (excluding the group stage) and only regard tournaments that have at least xx.xxx prizemoney. They should give bonus points, mainly because some players take certain tournaments more seriously then others. Are there players out there that will take a $100 tournament as seriously as a $100,000 tournament? Maybe, but I doubt the majority of players feel that way. I used a Bomber example earlier, but another one is Idra and the TL Open yesterday. Do you really think he would have done that same thing in a GSL or NASL Semifinals? | ||
|
Wren
United States745 Posts
On September 05 2011 01:39 Khaldor wrote: you have to keep in mind, that people who only win small tournaments will most certainly only play agains medium skilled players and therefore have a hard time to accumulate ranking points. The ranking already takes the skilllevels of the players into consideration which is why a player winning MLG for example will already gain a lot of points in the process as he has to defeat a lot of high skilled players. I think that this is why you can't add adjustments for tournament names. Opponent defeated is a vastly greater indication of skill than tournament finish. For example, tournaments like MLG have gigantic disparities in difficulty in the route to the finals, so a player who finishes 10th may have actually been a lot more impressive than somebody who beat a bunch of lesser players to be top 4. Not weighting finishes would be the right solution in such a case. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7032 Posts
| ||
|
RaiderRob
Netherlands377 Posts
| ||
|
figq
12519 Posts
When a player does well in tournament A, but not so well in tournament B, it increases the ranking of tournament B, and decreases the ranking of tournament A, and so on. As an example, Nestea plays mostly in the GSL, but he kind of wins a lot there, and beats people who win other big tournaments. This can contribute to the ranking of the GSL tournament as being higher than other big tournaments. If on the other hand, people who performed poorly in other tournaments were owning the GSL, that would mean the GSL is getting easier than those other tournaments... but so far this scenario doesn't happen much. :} | ||
|
lunchrush
United States138 Posts
The problem with this, then, is that tournaments like MLG with hundreds of players will have very few players with insane ELOs, and therefore by this model a win at MLG would be worth less than a win in a small, high-level invitational. A workaround to this is to use the number of players as another measure of the quality of a tournament. With two measures, each of which says something about the importance of winning a given matchup, we can define 'importance' a little more thoroughly. This way, a large tournament with many great players, like GSL Code S, will have a very high ranking, a tournament like the MLG open bracket with many decent players and some really good players will have a decent ranking, as will a small super-high-level invitational, and we'll judge the 'importance' of the little European cups by who's playing, as well as the size of the tournament. By plugging these variables into the right formula, we can probably get a model with results that everyone can agree on. I personally think that we should use only the data from specific matchups to determine player skill: if a player beats all the best players in the world, he's probably the best player in the world. However, I admit that this model is based on the assumption that it is just as easy to beat NesTea on the ladder as it is to beat him in the Code S Finals. Someone should ask Day[9] about it. | ||
|
Kalent
Canada253 Posts
| ||
|
karlmengsk
Canada230 Posts
| ||
|
Highways
Australia6120 Posts
Only problem is how to you determine the weight of each tournament objectively? | ||
|
Khaldor
Germany861 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games Grubby2848 Liquid`RaSZi1002 Beastyqt591 C9.Mang0289 RotterdaM162 XaKoH  157Livibee91 SteadfastSC61 CosmosSc2  23tarik_tv18 |
|
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
Replay Cast
RSL Revival
Clem vs Lambo
Scarlett vs Cure
CranKy Ducklings
IPSL
Dragon vs Hawk
RSL Revival
Classic vs Trap
herO vs SHIN
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
