Ranking List & EC Legendary Vampire Tournament

Forhead wrote:

I see now that I miss WarGrim's secound post. So disregard the second comment about Old timers having an advatage.

But I do think that the rankings better portray the top 25 then the TWDA.

I totally agree with you Isak. Unfortunatelly there is no way to create current ranking. It was supposed to be implemented onthe page till end of June 2011 but it didn't happen so we have to generate the TOP 25 list based on smth else.
We were also considering NCs to select 2 players for each European country and let them play for the Trophy, but some countries are bigger then other (more players) etc. so it wouldn't be a good idea.

If somebody is able to go through all Archons that Robyn has, and generate the list of TOP 100 that would be great . We were working on that but the project went "on-hold" . In such case, even a list for 2011 would be sufficient.

To be honest, current solution isn't also very succesfull as lots of great players will be missing, because on the orginizers who hadn't provided Lasombra with the TWD list.

I think this can be still fixed. If all NCs and Princes would sent the decklists to Lasombra we could update the list with players still missing !

Forhead wrote:

But I do think that the rankings better portray the top 25 then the TWDA.

There are no rankings.

Is this not sufficiently clear?

There have been no rankings for 9+ months.

Aside from there being no rankings at the moment, that method is as "flawed" as any "top 25 determination" you can get. There has been endless debates on Usenet how the ranking system didn't actually rank people because if you played a lot, you'd automatically have a higher rating.

Given the absence of an "official" rating at this point in time, using the TWDA is probably the best idea. I realize that some players that don't win a lot of tournaments are STILL awesome players but wargrim has to work with the data that's available.

That said, aside from creating a cut-throat environment with established, experienced players, I believe the primary goal of the Legendary Vampire tournament was to remove 25 already qualified players from the Last Chance Qualifier thus allowing more people to qualify under the premise that it would be likely these players would end up in the top spots.

In that light, using the TWDA is an *excellent* idea.

To both Izaak and Wargrim. I agree, if we're not able to get the ranking up to date then the TWDA is the second best option.

To Adonai: I were talking about an updated database (in case we were able to get it working).

Izaak wrote:

That said, aside from creating a cut-throat environment with established, experienced players, I believe the primary goal of the Legendary Vampire tournament was to remove 25 already qualified players from the Last Chance Qualifier thus allowing more people to qualify under the premise that it would be likely these players would end up in the top spots.

In that light, using the TWDA is an *excellent* idea.

That is an advantage - true.

Another idea to join two methods of creating list of TOP 25 players.
1. TWDA - 15-20 names
2. Individual Invitations for players who have presented great performance for last 18-20 months. NCs would choose 5-10 missing players, who are known as TOP players but for various reasons didn't manage to get to the TOP 25 list based on TWDA.

We have still several days to think it through and decide which method should be used. IMO the last "hybrid" option seems to be the best one.

There's something else that you're missing. Just being on a Final of a National Championship or Continental Qualifier should give you loads of points.

IF you want to call upon the help of the NC's (or other helpful volunteers), also take in consideration the following:

-Past rankings: starting from when the system entered torpor (Just 2010 and 2011 is not as Legendary).
-Add TWD's
-Add the points from entering the Finals of Continental Qualifiers, Continental Championships and National Championships.

Yes, it will mean that you'll have to do the work for 5 players in some tournaments, but it is much closer to fairness.

I still think that the whole system (even with everything working) is unfair, as those in better playgroups or with more travel money will always have the advantage, but that's a different story.

BTW - if you take my ideas in consideration, I might make it. Even if I do, I will respectfully decline.
That is in the off chance I go to Poland.