2014 various topics

I like your opinions on the set, but on the rankimg thing:

Its been discussed before, who is the best? And it cant be truly defined quantitatively. Only wins and points can.
So, you have half a list i agree with on greats, whereas my list has people on it who may say they arent that good.
Hugh is one of the best, winning and building and traveling. Great. One of my favorite contributors to the twda.
Ben Peal is great. Just hasnt won as much lately as previously.
John Bell is solid, but ive lost to him too much to be unbiased. He wins alot, food at it. Wont say i can beat him, evwn knowing how he plays tables and decks, but hes prefect at building exqctly to his playstyle. Interestingly, his isnt like mine.
Jay Kristoff builds cool thimgs, but plays alot different than me.
Then you have Mikkel craziness that im a huge fan of, but cant make myself play.
Also you Erim Ts, with monumental archetypes coming out.
Players like Loughman have decks i consider staples of the game, like carna, sheldon, and others. But there as well, im sure im biased.
I like Matt Hirshes playstyle, but not his deckbuilding in terms of what id play.
I like Pascals table mannerisms alot.
Matt Morgan i hate playing against. I always assume hes up to something, especially when hes not. Id be better if he were an easier read, but he does win and build decently.

Tiago has cool looking stuff. Dont think ive played him though.

Point is, TTC was top rankex forever, and glitch and unfathomably huge points ina CC are interchangeable to some people. So, we have this quantitatice system, complain if you want, but its crazy hard to really rate this and make people happy. At least its not as mathematically skewed as NCAA football rankings....
Not gonna be perfect, we can vote on greats, but its all gonna be opinions with scattered math as far as i can see.

But im glad it was mentionex in this blog.