GA Brawl PR updated 3/14/10. Now with Salt level status!

[Micaelis]

You know, now that I'm playing MK I kind of care about my ranking somewhat. Silly, I know. I think there needs to be some form of ranking besides tournaments and MMs. We need to be able to PR Match or something.

I mean, no offense to anyone above me, but I feel like I deserve a higher spot and yet I haven't been able to even attempt to prove it due to the way I usually get set up in brackets. Also, no one will MM me for $5+ and I know some of them don't do it because it would be for the PR then.

So am I just going to hope and pray I play one of those guys every tournament from now on? All in all I don't care TOO much, it's just kind of annoying (especially that stupid FMPOV thing. Kind of shows how bugged the system is right now). So instead of just QQing I'll go back to my original idea.

PR Matches... a match that one lower PR player can challenge a higher PR player to. This should be unrefusable since being able to refuse would defeat the purpose. It should be overviewed by a PR panelist. I'll let you guys work the kinks out but a general idea (very general idea) would be a tourney identical match (2/3) where if the higher player loses and QQs then you go MLG style and play maybe a 3/5 or 4/7 where you start the set where it left off. If the challenger loses then tough luck, you're worse. You can only PR Match a person once a TOURNAMENT.

I present this idea since the majority of GA seems to have money johns and the middle people seem evenly matched. This should provide more information for the panelists to better sort everyone out. I like the idea and you could even open it up to non-PR people too. That way players like McPeePants, BoT, and more could show up at a tournament and put more of an impression of their skill level into the judging.

I don't really see anything potentially horrible about it; it just gives a lot more information for our panelists to use (which I guess they could complain about if it's confusing for them). It even lends the higher player more wiggle room by allowing them to extend it to 4/7 or whatever to try to bring it back. I think we should at least try to implement a system like that and see if it'll help (PR members only first prob). Hey, if it fails, just disregard the results. The players can QQ if that happens but they'll get over it.

 

[Purple]

I do'nt mind doing this, because generally speaking, if a person is above or under you, they should be willing to solidify their ranking. playing you more only makes it easier for us to see whos better. I like this Micaelis

talked about the idea to micaelis a bit and came up with this.

In the sense of a rival rule, I agree with how it works out. This allows people who have trouble paying money, the ability to match PR for ranking. Howevre you're only allowed this rule for a few player

1) The player one slot above you in ranking
2) The player one slow below you in ranking
3) A non-PR member (if you're #10)
4) Someone who places one placing below or above you in tournament (at most recent tourney)

That's about it. At the opponent's expense, they can ask for a 2/3, 3/5, or 4/7 in a PR match if they feel like doing it.

 

[da K.I.D.]

people should just get better and place higher in tourney if you want to be higher on the PR. Dont john about how you always get lou/kismet/whoever first round of every tourney and just get good enough to beat them. thats what i did.

a PR is supposed to represent who performs the best in a tournament setting. IMO doubles and MMs/other non-tourney matches should have only a minimal effect on the actual list.

But if you do go through with this goofy PR match Idea, I will do everything in my power to hit top 5 in this region before I go back home on wednesday.

 

[Purple]

I'm trying to develop a system of how we make our rankings so we don't have to have as much discussion and instead we can just use the information and rulesets we have to create our ranking lists. For the time being, all of this information is very opinionated. If accurate enough, I feel this will really help out our PR making to be more accurate.

First off, in order to be eligible for the power rankings, you have to enter three tournaments. During the time span of the season. Entering a tournament means..

• You paid door fee (or got it waivered).
• You entered Brawl Singles.
• You played all of your matches (allowing someone else to play your matches is not allowed).
• You played until you either lost**, or the tournament ends in your favor (get first place, splitting pot, etc.).

** 'losing' means you are out of the tournament by pools or double elimination standards (technically speaking, you lost twice in Double elimination, or knocked out by pools)

After your enter three tournaments, does the MM rule truly come into play.

[collapse=Money Match Rule]By money matching a person for five dollars or more after a tournament's end, you are both agree that the winner of the MM will take the highest ranking out of the two players. If the higher ranking person wins, the ranking switch is void. Tournament results have higher priority than money matches. In the case of a tie between a money matcher and a tournament entrant, the tournament entrant get higher ranking automatically (unless the money matcher was in the previous PR and has a higher PR rank than the opponent).

There are a few rules too prevent people abusing this system.

• In order to money match someone and it count towards the PR, It must be five dollars or more, I'm just reasserting this rule.
• On top of this, the two players must be at most, two rankings above or below each other in order for it to count. Anything higher than that can potentially cause huge jumps in the PR that aren't deserved.
• Remember, FMPOV rankings change for each tournament, beating people in the PR via also allows you to play people higher in their respective rankings, it also shuts down others to be able to play you if you win.
• Money matches are for money, and we have no say to making a money match more or less fair for you or your opponent. Therefore the set is stable and can't be changed mid-game (READ: Power Ranking Matches : Salt Match Rule).
• A Panelist of that specific season MUST watch your money match in order for it to be legit
• If no Panelists are available one can be appointed.

[/collapse]


Now, there are a couple of problems with Money Matches. One problem is when people who don't want others to succeed they can merely refuse money matches. Another problem is people not having the required money to Money Match and it count for the PR. So thanks to Micaelis, here is an alternative method for us to determine PR rankings!

[collapse=Power Rankings Matches]
Power Rankings Matches (PRMs for short) are matches that are free of charge. The only thing that is on the line is ranking. However, PRMs have their differences from MMs in order to make them more efficient and fair for all people on and off the PR. Below are the general differences in PRMs.

• They are not refusable.
• They can only be done by people one placing apart on the PR or FMPOV.
• PR Matches between two people can only be done once per tournament.
• Just like with MMs, the more you win, the more the FMPOV changes. Also the more the FMPOV changes in your favor the higher ranking the players you can play.
• Since PRMs are not refusable, they are pushed slightly towards the higher ranking player's favor with the below rule.
• This rule is the salt match rule. PRMs are standardly a best 2/3 set. However, if a higher ranking player loses the set against a lower ranking player then the higher ranking player has the ability to enact this rule. This rule changes the set to a 3/5 instead of a 2/3. The set count up to that point still stands (if the higher ranked player lost 2-1 and enacts this rule then the set is now 2-1, best 3/5).
• Hey, you idiots out there. You can put money on your PRMs if you want. This is just a way to make it more accessible for people who don't have five dollars to throw out every tournament.

[/collapse]


Also, just so you guys know. For anyone who did a money match during that last tournament it still counts as if these rules were accepted then.

 

[bigman40]

If you really wanna find a method to get things correct, you can make all of this point based. To elaborate on what I mean:

In order, the following order (top to low) counts as most important to least important:

Tourney placing
Beating a PR member
Money matching a PR member
Challenging a PR member

I have tourney placing higher because this will get over-ruled when you begin to add in whether the player that placed good beat certain PR members or not. This makes it to where placing really high through a easy bracket doesn't get too powerful. Money matching can be like a few points or something and challenging a PR member even lower.

Obviously, people that beat PR members can get a certain amount of points relative to what rank those PR members are on the current list. As you count up the points for everything they all should be relative to the list I put up earlier (meaning that people won't get the same amount of points for beating PR #5 in tourney as they would for a money match). This, imo, will have to promote seeding using the PR to be truly accurate (of course, the point system has to be balanced enough too) and this will show that upcoming players will have to work hard while we avoid bracket screw-ups by making ranked members fight each other early in bracket than need be.

This is just my thought, so take what you will.

 

[FrozenHobo]

scatz, $5 MM?

 

[Micaelis]

bigman's idea sounds similar to Florida's that they had awhile back with a point system. If you want to do something like that you might want to ask Seibrik about it.

I however agree on the gist of what you're saying. But if you treat MMs and PRMs like a bracket match it should really come out similar. I'm pretty conflicted on my own opinion on this though... because I think tournaments should matter the most but at the same time, brackets really are random most of the time and I don't see how they should result in showing skill in relation to specific players unless they played each other.

At the very least I think tourney placing should be lowered on that list... sometimes you just get lucky. I mean hell, I placed 4th at that GT tournament awhile back among most of the PR and Alabama. Playing other PR members is the top most concern since the list IS about a player in relation to the others on that list.

I think my problem and maybe others is whether this list should be players ranked in relation to others or their ability to perform overall. Really it should be both but which should have more emphasis? Prime example is Lounis making top 8 at MLG but still being 2nd to Calvin on the PR. It's really hard to draw the line. I don't know myself and I doubt we'll ever get everyone to agree 100% to a set of rules.

For now I think we should just mainly fly with what Roxy has at CB and make tweaks based on how well/****ty it does at gathering information for the panelists.

 

[bigman40]

You missed some of my point. For my idea to be in effect, we'd have to do seeding by the PRs at every tourney. Someone messes up against a non-pr member, and that could give you a break. Or it can show that someone else deserves to be on the PR. Plus, if someone had an easy bracket, but didn't beat many PR members, then it would show when you count up the points compared to people that have beaten the PR members but not place as high.

MMes and PRMs aren't, in general, as serious (MMes, yeah, but not PRMs) as the brackets. There has to be a balance in it, and how many points people receive would determine how broken/balanced the system would be.

 

[da K.I.D.]

The PR is supposed to determine what players are overall better than others, and who is better and will place better in tournaments CONSISTENTLY.

Everyone has good days and bad days but consistentcy in tourney placings should be the highest regarded factor in these decisions.

 

[Micaelis]

As I said, so many different opinions.

Scatz, you seem to think we'd be able to seed the brackets based off PR, pretty sure that wouldn't happen barely at all but hey, maybe. The point system is a pretty good idea but is somewhat limited (don't feel like going into it, maybe tomorrow, going to bed now). I like it btw but it would take a lot of balancing/thought/time to implement and I think it would need more overall attendance to tournaments (I guess you could scale points for that factor too... whatever I want to sleep).

EDIT: Oh and I think it's opinion on whether PRMs and MMs are serious or not. I guess it would just depend on whether you value 5$+ more or an entire rank or more on the PR at an update.

KID... in a state like GA where pretty much you only get 20 regulars MAYBE... and a PR that is so close in skill... tournament results aren't everything. Plus, by doing mainly tournament results then you'd most likely have to factor in OoS tournaments (something the panel doesn't seem to want to do) and then it would enter into the realm of how good the players they played at the OoS tournament were etc etc. I don't know if you quite understand how much the rankings fluctuate among the lower half of the PR almost every tournament. Adding in these additional rules are just meant to help the placing process. Anyways, I'm pretty sure our PR is based more off "in relation" than "consistent tournament standings".

Whatever, I don't feel like arguing anymore tonight, especially on something so complex and pretty darn opinionated. Night.

EDIT: I super agree with Jamaal's post below.

 

[Purple]

You guys seem not very happy about money matches. I want to discuss something for a moment.

A tournament costs 10 dollars to enter correct? You play a randomly selected group of people depending on your skill level.

Since you're playing people based on your skill level, unless you play exceptionally well and beyond your ranking's standards, you will be playing the same people consistently throughout the entire season. That being said, I hear a lot of people say " man, i never got to play player X". This is true, that's why money matches should be equally important. I'm sure a great deal of you can say that you don't play certain people in tournament, and because of that your ranking isn't accurate.

Think about how seeding works. Players like biglou and kismet2, will more than likely not play anyone first round. players like scatt and player-1 won't be playing people on the PR, instead they will playing lower ranked or unknown players since they're high seeded, but not top seeded.

Now that leaves the mid level players on the PR, they don't deserve byes persay, but they do deserve to not play high ranking players either, so who do they play? Themselves. 7-8's would probably play 9-10.**

Think about it, money matches cost five dollars or more in order to count. this is enough for a small tournament pot fee. Plus the money matches are between one person to another. This information is great for PR's to use, the more information the better. Saying that money matches shouldn't be even or lesser powerful is pretty silly, considering it only affects two people, no more no less.

the winner gets higher and more consistent, the loser gets lower and less consistent, plain and simple.

For the people willing to get good, and do PR matches. It gives that same competitive spirit, if you want, you can put smaller amounts of money than five dollars. It doesn't really matter. But these should be evenly important.

** - I made a tournament on tio just to show exactly what would happen. in a 16 man bracket, and a tournament where everyone on the PR is available, players's 1-6 will play unknowns, while 7-10 will play one another. 7-10 play each other extremely often in winners, and then the loser plays 4-6 often after playing one unknown in losers. Generally giving the same results. However note that if this was to happen, to say... player 10. This would be his result.

player 10 plays player 7, which is a bad matchup. Loses in winners.

player 10 plays a random, wins

player 10 plays player 6, skill gap is large. loses.

He doesn't play 9 or 8, which stunt his potential grow. Even though he can potentially beat them, he doesn't get the opportunity in tournament. If seeded correctly, this would more than likely be happening almost every time. If player 10 takes things into his own hands, he can PRM player 9 and obtain a better ranking, then after winning, can PRM player 8 and potentially win. If he wins both, and his tournament results are consistent, it shows the panelists.

"hey, player 10 can't beat player 7 nor can he beat player 6, however in a tournament set of sorts, he has beaten player 8 and player 9 throughout the season in PRMs, and is worthy of getting a bump just for that if not contested.

Also, I don't think OoS players should be kept in the equation if we're to use OoS tournaments.

 

[Player-3]

holy ****


that is a lot of words

 

[da K.I.D.]

First of all, Id like to say that my region is even smaller than this and the number of people that will consistently show up to every tourney is AT MOST, 15. So I understand the concept of a small region of the top 5 being very solid and the 2nd 5 being much less concrete. Its basically the same exact situation.

next, ill say that in the example you used, you are saying that the skill level of all entrants is stable/stagnant, which is not the case. things are always changing, people are always getting better, and sometimes worse, all at different rates.

Think about it, money matches cost five dollars or more in order to count. this is enough for a small tournament pot fee. Plus the money matches are between one person to another. This information is great for PR's to use, the more information the better. Saying that money matches shouldn't be even or lesser powerful is pretty silly, considering it only affects two people, no more no less.

I feel the opposite, in that PR is not supposed to just say who would beat who in a match going all the way up, but who is better in a general sence. Take me for example. Lets say Scatt beats 4God in a PR match and is thus ranked above him. I come to a tourney or something, and 4god beats me and somebody else from my region and lou. Scatt loses to me and scatz. 4god beat someone Scatt lost to and in addition beat a highly ranked player, while scatt lost to a lower ranked player. They MM again and Scatt wins.

In this situation I feel the tourney matches are the most important and due to placing higher and beating higher ranked players 4god should be higher on this list, but that wouldnt happen if you put more emphasis on non tourney matches, feel me?

He doesn't play 9 or 8, which stunt his potential grow. Even though he can potentially beat them, he doesn't get the opportunity in tournament. If seeded correctly, this would more than likely be happening almost every time.

This is bracket johns.

I got exponentially better at smash and in tourneys when I got rid of my bracket johns and just said to myself, Im going to get good enough that no matter who I play, Im going to beat them, because Im the best one here. Saying you got bracket screwed is just a way to give you anexcuse for losing. In that case number 10 just needs to get better to the point where he can beat number 6. then he wont have to worry about 9,8 and 7 and going up one spot at a time.

Just my two pennies, Im an outsider, you dont have to listen to me, but I think its worth noting

 

[GTR!]

** - I made a tournament on tio just to show exactly what would happen. in a 16 man bracket, and a tournament where everyone on the PR is available, players's 1-6 will play unknowns, while 7-10 will play one another. 7-10 play each other extremely often in winners, and then the loser plays 4-6 often after playing one unknown in losers. Generally giving the same results. However note that if this was to happen, to say... player 10. This would be his result.

player 10 plays player 7, which is a bad matchup. Loses in winners.

player 10 plays a random, wins

player 10 plays player 6, skill gap is large. loses.

He doesn't play 9 or 8, which stunt his potential grow. Even though he can potentially beat them, he doesn't get the opportunity in tournament. If seeded correctly, this would more than likely be happening almost every time. If player 10 takes things into his own hands, he can PRM player 9 and obtain a better ranking, then after winning, can PRM player 8 and potentially win. If he wins both, and his tournament results are consistent, it shows the panelists.

"hey, player 10 can't beat player 7 nor can he beat player 6, however in a tournament set of sorts, he has beaten player 8 and player 9 throughout the season in PRMs, and is worthy of getting a bump just for that if not contested.

Also, I don't think OoS players should be kept in the equation if we're to use OoS tournaments.

Well at this point I don't think that Player 7 playing Player 10 should be that big of a difference because playes 7-10 are all grouped together, and thusly play eachother since they are all of similar skill. As K.I.D. said above me, if player 10 is complaining about not being able to play players 8 or 9 because he lost to player 7 then he is just bracket johnsing because.

If Player 10 is truly salty about losing then that is when he plays Players 8/9 in a MM and this should be where the MM's come into play. But honestly I think the whole power ranking system shouldn't be too difficult. It basically just comes down to winning. If you dont win you wont be ranked as high as someone who wins more than you.

But thats just my 2 cents.

 

[Player-1]

i dont like the prm idea, it is a lot of power for one set. i agree with kid. and no offense jamaal but dont you think that you should consult other panelist before making changes like this?

 

[Purple]

next, ill say that in the example you used, you are saying that the skill level of all entrants is stable/stagnant, which is not the case. things are always changing, people are always getting better, and sometimes worse, all at different rates.

That is true, not everything is stable. HOwever player 1 and 2 by example (biglou and kismet) would generally be correct, along with player 3 and 4 (player-1 and scatt) everything else changes, but that goes along with the chart as well right? Problem is that anyone who isn't on the PR, has a huge skill level gap between the current ranking PR (excluding a very small few, but even they either don't enter tourneys often, or don't care about ranking). So what we have is to be generally expected.

I feel the opposite, in that PR is not supposed to just say who would beat who in a match going all the way up,but who is better in a general sence.

Exactly, which is why every money match should be considered evenly, because it helps things be more accurate.

Take me for example. Lets say Scatt beats 4God in a PR match and is thus ranked above him.

Mkay, also note that Scatt not only beats 4God, but everyone under him, but continue.

I come to a tourney or something, and 4god beats me and somebody else from my region and lou. Scatt loses to me and scatz.

First off, you wouldn't be important, because your region's skill level can't really be judged on the same level as ours. Secondly, if scatz was to play Scatt and beat him, then yes that would be a huge drop, and make scatt look less consistent than 4god, however I don't see what that has to do with halting the rulesets.

Even if scatt mm's 4god again. It tells us this.

Scatt beats 4God very often, however Scatt also loses to lower ranked scatz. Scatz might be deserving of a boost, scatt might be deserving of a drop, and 4god might not need to particularly move (this is assuming he beats everyone under him, just loses to scatt).

No offense though, Scatt hasn't lost to Scatz yet to my knowledge, so i don't know what you giving me this example has to do with anything. All this is telling me is that if Scatt MM'd a lot of people, we know that he's worse than scatz, better than 4god, and better than the people he beat in tournament and MM/PRMs.

In this situation I feel the tourney matches are the most important and due to placing higher and beating higher ranked players 4god should be higher on this list, but that wouldnt happen if you put more emphasis on non tourney matches, feel me?

I'm not saying that Tournament matches are important, but you're underestimating MM's and overestimating tournaments. I for one went OoS to a tournament to where I got a double bye and just by sitting around hitting on NC girls I got a higher placing than Micaelis, who had an unlucky bracket, and there was nothing he can do about it. These things happen, and because of that they need to be acknowledged, and more information is needed to get a better idea of the ranking. MMs are just as important guys, they literally tell the panel "this guy is straight up better than this player, or goes even with this player, etc."


While tourneys give the basic idea of who's good and who's bad, MM's give the idea of who is right above who and so forth. They both are needed in their own light.

This is bracket johns.

And? It doesn't matter if a person gets better, it matters if a person gets to truly show themselves as being a certain placing when they deserve it. Do you really think if you thought you could beat two people, and never got the opportunity, that you would be happy about? Hell no. Do you think that if you were to MM these people and win, and your ranking stayed the same regardless of that, that you would be happy? Hell no.

Just my two pennies, Im an outsider, you dont have to listen to me, but I think its worth noting

your opinion is very important to us . I am listening, but also explaining why PRMs and MMs are helpful.

 

[Rayku]

Bracket johns are probably the most illegitimate johns ever. If you're going to use them, why even enter the tournament in the first place? So you can brag about losing to someone good? LOL

 

[GTR!]

i dont like the prm idea, it is a lot of power for one set. i agree with kid. and no offense jamaal but dont you think that you should consult other panelist before making changes like this?

I feel like P1 has a point with the PRM thing. I mean like you just said when you were responding go KID, not everything is stable. People can have off days and to penalize them just because of an off day is kinda screwed up IMO.

 

[bigman40]

Scatz, you seem to think we'd be able to seed the brackets based off PR, pretty sure that wouldn't happen barely at all but hey, maybe. The point system is a pretty good idea but is somewhat limited (don't feel like going into it, maybe tomorrow, going to bed now). I like it btw but it would take a lot of balancing/thought/time to implement and I think it would need more overall attendance to tournaments (I guess you could scale points for that factor too... whatever I want to sleep).

It's not that I think we can seed every tourney we go to. I merely stated it because it's the best option to keeping my idea more stable. If we can't seed at every tourney (or at all) then we need to make do with what we got.

If you feel like it, can you explain how it's limited? And to make something balanced, lots of time has to be placed in it in the first place (for this case, being as accurate as possible without having opinions).

Our overall attendance is decent enough for this to work. I thought scaling the points as our attendance gets bigger would be obvious. Now, the quality of our attendance obviously matters since the PR would generally not be dropping and adding new people anytime soon.

i dont like the prm idea, it is a lot of power for one set.

Bracket johns are probably the most illegitimate johns ever. If you're going to use them, why even enter the tournament in the first place? So you can brag about losing to someone good? LOL

QFT.

 

[Rayku]

okay GTR whenever I do poorly ever I'm just going to say I had an off day that way you won't penalize me for it

 

[GTR!]

okay GTR whenever I do poorly ever I'm just going to say I had an off day that way you won't penalize me for it

That isn't what I'm implying. Im simply stating that (mostly) everyone have consistency problems and certain days I could be better than you and happen to beat you. You are obviously better than me, so to penalize you heavily for losing to me in just one PRM set would be outrageous. I was just putting emphasis on P1's point that PRMs hold a lot of power.

Edited for better wording

 

[Purple]

so to penalize you for losing to me in a set would be outrageous

el. oh. el.

People need to be penalized to losing to people, we have to be strict about consistency problems. People who are more consistent should be higher ranked.

 

[GTR!]

el. oh. el.

People need to be penalized to losing to people, we have to be strict about consistency problems. People who are more consistent should be higher ranked.

The 2nd part of what you said it pretty much the point I was getting at I edited my earlier post for more appropriate wording

 

[Rayku]

Why do you think I hate ranking Dyno all the freaking time? That guy's the most inconsistent ****er in the state.

And most of GA below spot #3 is highly inconsistent as well. GA's a hard as hell state to rank because of consistency problems.

But yes, you should be penalized just as hard as ever for being inconsistent, no matter the circumstance. If you have a problem with that, stop playing an inconsistent game like Brawl.

If I were to lose to you, GTR, in a "PRM" set, yes I should be penalized just as hard as ever. Who cares if I'm having an off day?

 

[Dynomite]

Hello Rayku

 

[Purple]

Why do you think I hate ranking Dyno all the freaking time? That guy's the most inconsistent ****er in the state.

THE TRUTH

And most of GA below spot #3 is highly inconsistent as well. GA's a hard as hell state to rank because of consistency problems.

Exactly, which is why these money matches are so important, I don't think you guys have ever looked at these **** results you guys give us after the season's over, they are ****ing ridiculous.

But yes, you should be penalized just as hard as ever for being inconsistent, no matter the circumstance. If you have a problem with that, stop playing an inconsistent game like Brawl.

Game isn't even all that inconsistent though, just people don't learn matchups or learn how to play with their head here.

If I were to lose to you, GTR, in a "PRM" set, yes I should be penalized just as hard as ever. Who cares if I'm having an off day?

Having an off day shouldn't entirely go against fundamentals, after certain skill levels, even when having a bad day, you shouldn't lose to people who are not as skilled as you. Get close to losing? Maybe. Lose entirely? An entire set? Nah.

 

[Player-1]

Like I said before, I don't like the PRM because it has too much power for one set, which is why I like tournament results a lot more and think we should just stick with that. And I agree with the off day thing, but (and this is just an example) for characters like Diddy, Falco, and ICs vs MK in a 2/3 set one wrong move can change the whole set for these characters against MK, one wrong move and then you get gimped at a low percent and you lose the match on your neutral stage, you CP the next one and you win, but MK has so many good CPs against these characters that a lot of people consider it an autowin for MK. Now I'm not trying to make character johns, but I'm just trying to point out that one mistake can change a PR placing is kind of ridiculous (and that's just an example of what I mean when I say too much power in one set, not trying to base it off of that one example). If it was me in that example, then I'd be perfectly content with it being a normal tournament set because it was, after all, my fault that that would have happened, but in a PRM and that happened, then, again, it's just pretty stupid that one set holds that much power.

 

[Rayku]

That's getting too far in the nitty-gritty, Player1. Once again, if you don't want one move deciding an entire set, then stop playing Brawl. Otherwise it comes with the package of playing your game.

Don't use a choice you make as an excuse.

 

[Purple]

BTW, if you think about it, each set 'decides' your ranking in tournament, it's not like you often play the same person you played in winners in losers unless you're higher ranked.

 

[Player-1]

That's getting too far in the nitty-gritty, Player1. Once again, if you don't want one move deciding an entire set, then stop playing Brawl. Otherwise it comes with the package of playing your game.

Don't use a choice you make as an excuse.

(and this is just an example)

but I'm just trying to point out that one mistake can change a PR placing is kind of ridiculous (and that's just an example of what I mean when I say too much power in one set, not trying to base it off of that one example).

because it was, after all, my fault that that would have happened, but in a PRM and that happened, then, again, it's just pretty stupid that one set holds that much power.

which is exactly why I included those 3 things into my post so people don't misunderstand what I'm trying to say like you...

I'm saying that one set shouldn't hold that much power when trying to decide PRs which is why I like tournament results which show an average of how that person places.

 

[Rayku]

Of course one set doesn't hold too much power in a power rankings. It's only one set. That's like updating the power rankings completely after one tournament, with no prior knowledge before then.

If all of this was already said in that huge-*** wall of text you guys had last page then pardon me for not wasting an hour of my time reading babble

 

[Player-1]

I do'nt mind doing this, because generally speaking, if a person is above or under you, they should be willing to solidify their ranking. playing you more only makes it easier for us to see whos better. I like this Micaelis

talked about the idea to micaelis a bit and came up with this.

In the sense of a rival rule, I agree with how it works out. This allows people who have trouble paying money, the ability to match PR for ranking. Howevre you're only allowed this rule for a few player

1) The player one slot above you in ranking
2) The player one slow below you in ranking
3) A non-PR member (if you're #10)
4) Someone who places one placing below or above you in tournament (at most recent tourney)

That's about it. At the opponent's expense, they can ask for a 2/3, 3/5, or 4/7 in a PR match if they feel like doing it.

To my understanding if you lose the PR set then you get knocked down and the other person goes up after that one set which, IMO, holds too much power.

 

[Rayku]

Why not just keep it the same way it's been forever and leave it to tournament results and money matches that people would like to be counted?

A money match would count if the two people playing on it agreed to let it have stakes other than Mr. Abraham Lincoln

Tourney match you don't really have a choice.

Sounds like Jamaal trying to go out on a limb to complicate something that's not complicated to me

 

[Player-1]

That's exactly what I've been trying to say >.>


and btw, I have no idea what the MM rule is, but I haven't ever gotten a MM challenged to me except Alby last tournament, but then changed his mine and except for rayku challengnig everyone on the top 10.

 

[Micaelis]

... I'm not going to type much but lol did you guys even read any of the posts? I know they were walls of texts but really...

PRMs are basically the same as MMs except there is no money involved and the higher ranked player even gets an advantage. All it does it affect the FMPOV and tell the panelists who can potentially beat who by the end of the season (same deal as a 5$+ MM). It's essentially the same as being matched up against the person in brackets except if you're higher ranked you get an ADVANTAGE.

You guys are acting like you're suddenly going to lose one PRM because you're playing bad that day or something and you're going to lose your spot. You can't even challenge anyone either. There's restrictions on who you can ask for a PRM. Just read for crying out loud, won't kill you.

Plus, not sure what the overall problem is... all these things mentioned could easily happen in a normal bracket match against the same player and those count even more than any MM or PRM. So... just don't lose, how about that?

 

[Player-1]

I read what you said, but to actually get placed above someone in a PR because of just one set is kind of dumb.

 

[Rayku]

Sounds like a multiple player barline challenge to me.

So, what Jamaal is saying is an insane amount of complicated info that everyone needs to remember/memorize to help the PR's which aren't even that misconstrued (reminds me of a certain namesearching FL player...he'll probably find this anyway and hate my guts for it anyway LOL)

and Michael's explaining that this PRM is just a money match without money on the line.

I'm not going to read something that isn't necessary to read and that also doesn't spark my interest, apologies. You can think less of me if you want

 

[Micaelis]

I read what you said, but to actually get placed above someone in a PR because of just one set is kind of dumb.

No. You did not read what I said. At all. No offense P-1. But you didn't if you still think what I quoted there.

EDIT: And yeah Rayku, that's pretty much it. Just a MM with no money that influences the PR update. There's just extra restrictions and rules throw in to make it more balanced since like you said, there's no money.

Overall I don't think you guys should worry about it. Rayku, you're not on the list and don't want to be. And P-1, who are you afraid that you'd lose to in a PRM anyways? Do you lose MMs and brackets to anyone below you? PRMs don't even count as much as winning a bracket match so just keep placing well and beating people and even if you lost a PRM I doubt you'd even move.

 

[Player-1]

but from my understanding of what jamaal posted, then it shifts people rankings from one set.

 

[Micaelis]

but from my understanding of what jamaal posted, then it shifts people rankings from one set.

I think you just misunderstood him. It does not guarantee a spot change AT ALL. All it does is give the panelist more info on who can beat who. The only potential "spot move" is on the FMPOV which is a silly (but kind of useful) list anyways imo.

This is the post that has the PRM rule in it and it makes sense somewhat... at least I thought so... http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10328015&postcount=764