Scot and Cory's new ranking system

Whatever happened to publicizing the new ranking system, or at least publishing information about it, after Worlds? I would like to hear the public's reaction to it . . .

Well, JerBear, I'm glad you asked! I've been itching to put it out there, but two things are stopping me right now:

1. They still haven't posted the results from Worlds. Once that happens, I can enter those results all the way on the right side of the spreadsheet and delete the oldest Worlds from the left side. There are two potential ways to do that, which I also need to test to see which way will keep the most accurate info.

2. I was waiting for CC to figure out the formula for calculating only the top 8 results. He has figured it out, but he hasn't figured out how to do it while keeping the "real-time" changes intact. It's kind of a clusterfuck. We've been debating whether or not we actually need to do this. The primary reason to do it is so that people (like yourself) can't "buy" their ranking by simply attending a butt-load of tournaments, but then again, why not reward that kind of dedication?

Anyway, as soon as someone posts results, give me a day or two and I'll be putting it out there for the rest of the world to see.

Yo Scot!

I am jumping in the party late here, cause I haven't been able to really get into this topic, but it is super important. What I am gathering from two good discussions we have had here are the following needs for it:

1. Tournaments prove their value by attending players points, in other words if Chicago is huge this year it would be move up a level.

2. All points should decay, not just worlds points. This keeps players that miss worlds in the loop, as worlds is jumping continents that would help keep things more accurate.

Are either of those in the works, sorry for being so uneducated here. This effort rocks.

Hey. I haven't forgotten about this nor have I quit working on it. I am behind, though, and I've been struggling to keep up. They run a lot of tournaments over there in Europe and there have been A LOT of new names added to the list of competitors. It makes it difficult for me to keep up. It's a good problem to have though. I believe that it means that we are definitely growing as a sport. Anyway, I got the doubles side caught up about a week ago, but I still have to do singles. The last time I looked, Phoenix results weren't posted, so I'll have to work that in once I've caught everything else up. Look for me to send you something on the side within the next week or two.

There is still the issue with the spreadsheet only recognizing the best 8 results, and until that issue is resolved anything that I show to the public would be skewed anyways. I'll get the data entry caught up within the next week, and I'll be sure to copy this thread to CC and see if I can't nudge him a little to get back to work on this.

I've been working on this for about a year and a half, and I can tell you that it works. It automatically decreases values for older tournaments, and it accurately correlates the individual participant levels to the tournament level. I will make it my goal to have it completely up and running BEFORE the Mud Island Belt this year. I will also get back on Ben Cochrane about integrating the rankings into a web-based program that will automatically take registration data and figure out seeding, brackets, and be available to upload results to recalculate rankings immediately following the event, which was the original vision that spawned this whole project.