rankings... or not?

View previous topic View next topic Go down

rankings... or not?

Post  Admin on Mon May 09, 2011 4:54 pm

I had some interesting feedback from a few players who asked me if WASPA will really need rankings. Great question because as long as WASPA will try to develop the "amateur" play, rankings are maybe not a priority. What do you think?
avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1330
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 43
Location : Somewhere in Belgium

View user profile http://templeuveunited.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: rankings... or not?

Post  dromer on Tue May 10, 2011 11:46 am

For me a ranking is useless but some other amateurs might like it so i think it's better to have a ranking. I never looked at the ranking of FISTF and i won't look at the waspa ranking .

dromer
Grand Prix Winner
Grand Prix Winner

Posts : 54
Join date : 2010-09-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: rankings... or not?

Post  Kaitsu on Tue May 10, 2011 12:46 pm

I don't need ranking, bet lots of player won't neither. But i'm still ok with either decision.
avatar
Kaitsu
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 138
Join date : 2010-04-21
Location : Helsinki / Finland

View user profile http://www.subu.fi

Back to top Go down

Re: rankings... or not?

Post  Thossa on Tue May 10, 2011 2:52 pm

Maybe it is possible to create a new ranking system based more on the idea to participate than to win for the main part. Basketball
avatar
Thossa
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 627
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 55
Location : Far beyond

View user profile http://www.dstfb.de

Back to top Go down

Re: rankings... or not?

Post  Admin on Tue May 10, 2011 3:06 pm

Thossa wrote:Maybe it is possible to create a new ranking system based more on the idea to participate than to win for the main part. Basketball
This is the idea (see handbook for details). Very Happy
avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1330
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 43
Location : Somewhere in Belgium

View user profile http://templeuveunited.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: rankings... or not?

Post  Thossa on Tue May 10, 2011 5:00 pm

That´s not what I wanted to say. I have meant not a ranking like in FISTF on sports basic. More a ranking to motivate to participate. Just to give an example to show what I mean. Like: 50 points only for playing a tournament, 75 points for reaching the ko-system and 100 points for the winner. Something like that. Easy and jff Razz
avatar
Thossa
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 627
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 55
Location : Far beyond

View user profile http://www.dstfb.de

Back to top Go down

Re: rankings... or not?

Post  Admin on Tue May 10, 2011 7:00 pm

The idea is:
- every player automatically gets one point (for taking part)
- according to the importance of the importance of the tournament, only some players get points (in a regional tournament for instance, only the last 4 get points)
- there is also a percentage of points as according to the number of players taking part
- the consolation tournament gives a very small bonnus (in a regional tournament for instance, only the finalists get bonus points)

The ranking is not very important but I understand it can help to make seedings for instance.
avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1330
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 43
Location : Somewhere in Belgium

View user profile http://templeuveunited.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: rankings... or not?

Post  alex popoff on Wed May 11, 2011 12:57 am

Admin wrote:The idea is:
- every player automatically gets one point (for taking part)
- according to the importance of the importance of the tournament, only some players get points (in a regional tournament for instance, only the last 4 get points)
- there is also a percentage of points as according to the number of players taking part
- the consolation tournament gives a very small bonnus (in a regional tournament for instance, only the finalists get bonus points)

The ranking is not very important but I understand it can help to make seedings for instance.

If we start to do a ranking, we'll need to classify the importance of each tournament and we'll do the same mistake as actually (Majors, GP, open ... ). A majority of players will go only to some tournaments for the points and not for ... the quality of organisation.
It's better to let each organisator do his best to attract players thanks to promotion, quality of organisation, good reputation, prizegiving, presence of medias, equipments ...
A ranking satisfy 10 players and disapoint all the others after few months ...
avatar
alex popoff
Grand Prix Winner
Grand Prix Winner

Posts : 59
Join date : 2010-08-31
Location : Monaco/France

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: rankings... or not?

Post  hönkki on Wed May 11, 2011 10:14 am

If I think our tournaments (Helsinki Open), I have got the impression that SOME of the foreigners have participated because of easy rankingpoints, and for us it is good to attract as many foreigners as possible, no matter what are their reasons to come here. I also see ranking useful when seeding players.

So, I'm not totally againts the rankings, but I have to say the positions worse than 300 in the open category rankinglist don't tell much about the level of players. Someone does a big job when updating the ranking. Is it worth of that ?

I would keep the ranking, but change it a bit.

hönkki
Grand Prix Winner
Grand Prix Winner

Posts : 74
Join date : 2010-04-23
Age : 51
Location : Helsinki, Finland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: rankings... or not?

Post  Admin on Wed May 11, 2011 12:37 pm

What I really hate the most in the FISTF rankings is that for the last 2 years, I didn't advance more than the 2nd round in all Opens, GPs and Majors I played but I'm still not allowed to play Futures because I'm too high in the ranking. Looks like I'm penalized for playing too much... Very Happy
avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1330
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 43
Location : Somewhere in Belgium

View user profile http://templeuveunited.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: rankings... or not?

Post  von K. on Wed May 11, 2011 1:48 pm

I would definitely start using the ELO ranking system or its modification. The correct modification just needs a bit of searching and mathematical skill. In some part of Italy this has been tested.

This would rank players according to the actual skill and results. Not according to the times people play. It would be better (perfect is not possible for a small activity like TF) if the wish is to have a global ranking. This sort of system still gives the reason to travel to smaller competitions, that Hönkki mentioned, but it does not put players like me in the top 100 or stop Vincent from participating in tournaments of his level.

von K.
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 854
Join date : 2010-04-21
Location : Finland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: rankings... or not?

Post  Thossa on Wed May 11, 2011 2:42 pm

What do you want? An other semiprofessional association a la FISTF or ab amateur association with easy and incomplex structures, rules and guidelines?
avatar
Thossa
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 627
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 55
Location : Far beyond

View user profile http://www.dstfb.de

Back to top Go down

Re: rankings... or not?

Post  Admin on Wed May 11, 2011 6:14 pm

Option 2. As easy as possible but ... not "too amateur", lol
avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1330
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 43
Location : Somewhere in Belgium

View user profile http://templeuveunited.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: rankings... or not?

Post  von K. on Wed May 11, 2011 7:08 pm

Thossa wrote:What do you want? An other semiprofessional association a la FISTF or ab amateur association with easy and incomplex structures, rules and guidelines?

Is this a general question about the need for ranking, Thossa?

In general I'd of course say option 2. But if you want a ranking that works (the FISTF version doesn't for example) it is not possible to do very easily and without thought.

von K.
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 854
Join date : 2010-04-21
Location : Finland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: rankings... or not?

Post  Heinz Eder on Mon May 23, 2011 1:50 pm

Hi, if you want to solve that problem take the points and divide it through the number of events you play. based on the result you can make rules who can play which event.
that would be the solution in my opinion, if you want to keep the actual FISTF ranking.

Admin wrote:What I really hate the most in the FISTF rankings is that for the last 2 years, I didn't advance more than the 2nd round in all Opens, GPs and Majors I played but I'm still not allowed to play Futures because I'm too high in the ranking. Looks like I'm penalized for playing too much... Very Happy

Heinz Eder
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 781
Join date : 2010-04-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: rankings... or not?

Post  Admin on Wed Mar 27, 2013 7:48 pm

The Isle of Man is the 31st "nation" to be part of WASPA. And that's not a joke!
avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1330
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 43
Location : Somewhere in Belgium

View user profile http://templeuveunited.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: rankings... or not?

Post  Admin on Tue Apr 02, 2013 3:46 pm

Updated file with results, rankings, stats on the blog!
avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1330
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 43
Location : Somewhere in Belgium

View user profile http://templeuveunited.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: rankings... or not?

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum