The North Carolina Melee Power Rankings! Updated 8/14/14!

[Dorsey]

I didn't leap to an assumption man, if you go back and read, it's clarified. You obviously didn't.

By the way, just for future reference: An example isn't a counterexample if it doesn't counter anything. LOOOOOOOOOOOOOL. Your example will never happen. It doesn't counter anything.

Lol, I can see a classic Josh meltdown coming up here soon, so I will "stop wasting your time".

Maybe the next one will be his "last post".

Karn-- How is that being unfair exactly, over-all? This new player got into an "unfair" situation due to a bad seed, right? Why was his seed bad?

Also, do you mean a new player, or a non-pr'd player? The seeding scale I suggested would have data for everyone, unless they didn't attend anything. And if they don't attend anything well... it would be unfair to the others that do attend stuff and work for their seed, opposed to just giving out a seed arbitrarily(lol). I would hope the panel could place someone like this in a spot though so it infringes on ALL PARTICIPANTS fairness in the least, including the actual player. If he beats people, as I said, his seeding will be better for the next tourney. I don't see how that's unfair exactly(someone having to work there way up to get ranked). I think that giving that person a great seed would be less fair than doing that... Something on the lines of what sneak said(the only piece of information I have used from sneak) in regard to labeling an inactive but skilled player with a "5". Not saying that should be it, but that's on the right track.

Also, I did not mean to come across insulting...well I did, but I was trying to make some people laugh that see the humor in the situation like me lol. You obviously don't, and I'm sorry. Just seems that effort put forth to adjusting/better the PR has been completely futile over the years.

 

[Lightsyde]

I didn't leap to an assumption man, if you go back and read, it's clarified. You obviously didn't.

You leapt to an assumption that NC was the only state with a panel. That is a fact and I will quote your post in 3 seconds. You immediately backtracked.

By the way, just for future reference: An example isn't a counterexample if it doesn't counter anything. LOOOOOOOOOOOOOL. Your example will never happen. It doesn't counter anything.

For future reference, learn what logical terms mean:

Counterexample: n. An example that refutes or disproves a hypothesis, proposition, or theorem.

In order for an example to be a counterexample, it needs only to meet the standard that it shows an iteration in which your argument/system delivers false results. I used the scrub tournament example. I even gave instances where stuff like that has happened; Chris' win over Sneak from last period essentially came from that type of setting. My example has happened, please just read what I say.

Lol, I can see a classic Josh meltdown coming up here soon, so I will "stop wasting your time".

Again with this sidestep after I responded to all your points. I'm not mad or flustered in the slightest. I just can't believe how loudly you are showing everyone that you don't understand how to have a logical argument.

Maybe the next one will be his "last post".

No, this one is.

Karn-- How is that being unfair exactly, over-all? This new player got into an "unfair" situation due to a bad seed, right? Why was his seed bad?

Lmao I am convinced you don't know how to read.

Okay, closing SWF.

EDIT: Said I would post this:

\Why is there even a panel? Is it normal to have a panel to interpret stuff like this?? No, I have never heard of such a thing, therefore I can only conclude that the use a panel/system was done on a whim by the NC smash scene, therefore it is arbitrary. rofl.. just some weird logic that's applicable to just about everything(the whole arbitrary thing).

This is an assumption. You immediately had to clarify when Sneak completely proved you wrong.

 

[Dorsey]

hahahaha I didn't say that. Since you didn't quote my post like you said that you would, I will for you:

Yeah. I singled out NC just because I wasn't sure if their systems paralleled ours.

Would have made the same statement except saying it was an "arbitrary" idea to start it all.

I singled out NC, because I didn't know if the panels of other states were run just like ours. I've looked at other PR threads other than NC's, and if that is your best argument then it's a good thing you're closing SWF. Sneak proved me wrong? Omg man.... lol. That is seriously the best you've got? Trying to say that I didn't know other states had panels also because I was mocking the word arbitrary? I posted the above quote within like 30 secs of sneak's post anyway. How could I be lying about that exactly, and why would I lie about it to begin with? Your desperation to win this little discussion is apparent, being that piece of info has 1) not much to do with what I'm saying, I was mocking the word arbitrary and 2) you're getting mad while not even addressing/refuting what I have to say about the point system.

Counterexample: n. An example that refutes or disproves a hypothesis, proposition, or theorem.

You took the word out of context. Notice the two verbs describing what a counterexample actually does: It refutes or disproves. Your example is not plausible and not probable to the extent that it is impossible in this discussion, seeing as it has never happened. Your example does not refute, disprove, or counter anything.

I am sure that was your last post this time, though.

 

[bossa nova ♪]

john, may the spirits shed even a planck length of their infinite luck and kindness to you. i only wish i could help, but sadly i am unlearned and wikipedia is insufficient.


to the rest of you: get lives

 

[Dorsey]

currently working a double on a hurricane wrecked island that's in 6 pieces that residents are still not allowed to come back to. so... don't have much of a life atm. it's a ghost town around here.

 

[bossa nova ♪]

no johns



i'm getting my d*** sucked as i type


everyone say what's up to claire

 

[Lightsyde]

hahahaha I didn't say that. Since you didn't quote my post like you said that you would, I will for you:



I singled out NC, because I didn't know if the panels of other states were run just like ours. I've looked at other PR threads other than NC's, and if that is your best argument then it's a good thing you're closing SWF. Sneak proved me wrong? Omg man.... lol. That is seriously the best you've got? Trying to say that I didn't know other states had panels also because I was mocking the word arbitrary? I posted the above quote within like 30 secs of sneak's post anyway. How could I be lying about that exactly, and why would I lie about it to begin with? Your desperation to win this little discussion is apparent, being that piece of info has 1) not much to do with what I'm saying, I was mocking the word arbitrary and 2) you're getting mad while not even addressing/refuting what I have to say about the point system.

This was the most minor point of my response. You just ignored the part where I gave examples of how the point system discussion predated you by 2 years.

Counterexample: n. An example that refutes or disproves a hypothesis, proposition, or theorem.

You took the word out of context. Notice the two verbs describing what a counterexample actually does: It refutes or disproves. Your example is not plausible and not probable to the extent that it is impossible in this discussion, seeing as it has never happened. Your example does not refute, disprove, or counter anything.

I am sure that was your last post this time, though.

Got caught up long enough to check and make sure you embarrassed yourself one more time.

And what are you talking even about? Animazement, gaming cons that PR'd players could attend, Asheboro's, the tourney that Chris' car swept the other day. etc Those are examples of times that it's happened. These tournaments happen, I've been to them, I've played in them, I've gotten paid money for them. That makes them plausible, real examples.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterexample

"In philosophy, counterexamples are usually used to argue that a certain philosophical position is wrong by showing that it does not apply in certain cases. "

Again, a counterexample only needs to show one false instance. That's how Science works too. If you want to make a case and disprove Evolution, for example, you'd need only find one fossil in the wrong era (rabbits in the precambrian). Likeliness/plausibility has nothing to do with what it means to be a counter example. I provided one.

Anyone reading this thread who understands philosophical/logical terminology, regardless of how they feel about this debate, will likely contest that my single example is enough to show a flaw in your approach to attendance and therefore provide a counterexample.

Oh, and the volumes of posts written by Kevin or Karn over the last two years as to why the amount of people in attendance is not nearly as important as who is there/who you beat there.

 

[Dorsey]

Link a ranking period where there was both "a stacked 50 scrub tourney" and a strong 8 man tourney in the same ranking period. Show it to me.... How many people were at the asheboro tourney(if there weren't anything close to 50 scrubs, then you fail), and what strong 8 man bracket was in the same period as this?

I'll make it easier for you so maybe that really will be your last post............there isn't one..........

you didn't counter ****. Just like your own dictionary definition ***** you then you went to wikipedia.

Tell me why the point system I suggested is bad. Show me where my fault is. lol... and I'm not embarrassed, Josh. The guy who is prone to rage about losses and is always johning, is also the guy who is more prone to getting embarrassed because he obviously cares more than anyone else. How is that for philosophy?


hi claire

 

[Bl@ckChris]

this period, no.

i'd say the hickory tournament was a pretty strong 8 man bracket.

pp, twitch, mahone, KP, jim, stingers, me.

but i don't think the bracket was made cause the only thing that happened really was that pp beat twitch lol. and i finally beat stingers in tournament.

i would say it was seeded right, and placement does matter. but i would also say that even though i tied for 5th, i'm fairly confident i could beat jim in a set right now. but we didn't play. but he placed 4th. ranking me and jim against each other cannot simply be summed up in "he placed fourth, he's better". it can better be summed up by how we played against other people and comparing those records.

tournament placing alone cannot rank me and jim. we would HAVE to look at set counts in order to compare us.

and thats why the PR system is what it is

 

[Dorsey]

for that tournament he got 1 more point than you did, or well, a fraction of a point once you factor in the other tournaments(assuming a pt system). It's not who is better(the comparison between you and Jim)... even the current PR doesn't show that, according to the panel. But I have a question.. for that tournament, is there anything that jim did that could have made him worthy of receiving a fraction of a point more than you, assuming the use of a pt system? I did say that if two people were really close, you'd want to take a look at who played who, but with a pt system as a basis it would make it easy/obvious where that's necessary for everyone.

 

[Dark Hart]

After reading, Dorsey seems to have a fairly large ****

Josh's seemed to have an ED problem

But Cam's the only one getting dome currently so your arguments don exits

 

[*P*L*U*R*]

Oh my god.

NC smash.

wah wah wah wah-wah wah
*silly arm gesture*

 

[Lightsyde]

Link a ranking period where there was both "a stacked 50 scrub tourney" and a strong 8 man tourney in the same ranking period. Show it to me.... How many people were at the asheboro tourney(if there weren't anything close to 50 scrubs, then you fail), and what strong 8 man bracket was in the same period as this?

I'll make it easier for you so maybe that really will be your last post............there isn't one..........

you didn't counter ****. Just like your own dictionary definition ***** you then you went to wikipedia.

Tell me why the point system I suggested is bad. Show me where my fault is. lol... and I'm not embarrassed, Josh. The guy who is prone to rage about losses and is always johning, is also the guy who is more prone to getting embarrassed because he obviously cares more than anyone else. How is that for philosophy?

hi claire

It doesn't have to happen. The fact that it is possible is enough proof to show a flaw in your system.

Chris even provided you an example of a stacked bracket that had happened recently. I listed numerous tournaments where it's happened. Gaming conventions don't post their brackets on Smashboards. Most importantly, it's an example. I even explained that I picked an arbitrary big number to show you how tourney size could be disproportionate to level of competition.

You misunderstood the dictionary definition, so I went to a source that had a definition specific to debate. It didn't **** anything, I just assumed you were smart enough to apply a general dictionary definition. You werent' so I found one that you couldn't possibly misinterpret....somehow you still did, which baffles me. You're so focused on the word "counter" that you aren't comprehending that I was only seeking to show that your system has a flaw.

Your point system is flawed because it contains a variable contingent on placing at a tournament; you think this is important for some ridiculous reason despite that I have explained why it's bad, Alex has explained why it's bad, and Chris has shown why it's bad in the last 2 or 3 pages. The number of people at a tournament has very little to do with how difficult a tournament is, especially if only 3 or 4 people are PR'd. Asheboro, again, is an example where stuff like this can happen.

And when is the last time you played me? Or saw me? Why do you keep talking as if you any idea what kind of player I am 2 years further into my Smash career? Talk to Dave about me before you mention this again. Please. I've made a serious active effort to cut out my anger and cut out my johns. Ask anyone.

And frankly, this conversation ceased to be about the PR's a while ago; I already expressed that Adam/Aasem/David/anybody who only came to one should have been excluded. I've been responding because you are insulting panelists and a system that works if we actually give it data. We basically use a point system already and if we were to translate it to a literal one, I would want it to favor a variable for attendance. I keep responding because you keep insulting me despite me just explaining my arguments and you keep not understanding the explanations.

If you understood anything about logical debate, you'd understand that every time you have to insult me or question my character (someone who you no longer know in real life but talk like you do), you invalidate your points. If I wanted to sound like you, I'd just remind you that you've never made it past the second round of any Melee tournament and have no basis to discuss these things. Or digress even further and just remind you that I can (and have) 4 stocked people who can 4 stock you. My name is 3rd on this list (should be 5th or 6th not for attendance drops) and I'm not sure you've ever placed at ANYTHING not in the double digits. You understand so little about Melee that I feel like I lost this argument even discussing this stuff with you.

But saying that stuff adds nothing to my argument, so I don't know why you think saying things about me adds anything to yours.

 

[Bl@ckChris]

well, neither of us beat anybody pr'd.

i beat stingers and smith maybe, and lost to pp and twitch.

i think jim beat KP and some other person (oos marth) and lost to twitch twice i think. idk what the bracket was. i smoked and it didn't matter cause i knew i wasn't gonna beat twitch and that tournament was full of **** cuz nobody went lol.

in theory, him beating KP in the round that i lost to twitch is the difference. but we'd have to figure out how many "points" KP is worth, being that he's oos and not ranked.

but basically, we lost the same ways (friggin nanneys), and had all the "meaningless" wins we could get, but he placed higher cause he got KP and i got twitch lol.

edit: JESSE AND JOSH PLEASE STOP TALKING ABOUT EACH OTHER. BLARGH. jesse pllleeeeaaaaseeeeee just find a way to get to a tournament and smoke with us and seed a bracket and chill with us. and beat us if you can.

 

[Dorsey]

Again, please link me to a PR period that has both had "50 scrubs + 3 good players" and a "strong 8 man bracket". If you don't this time, I am going to take that as "I am wrong". You can write all this stuff saying there is, or you can just link me the PR period and state which two tourneys considered had this in the same period. Still waiting for that.

And no, I haven't seen you in quite some time. I did notice on this site about 6 months ago when basically everyone had paralleled experiences with you, like the one I described. Kind of like when I beat you in a MM when I was trash at this game, and then you demanded a rematch and got all salty, so I switched characters and just played a lax game so your ego could remain intact and healthy(sound familiar anyone? lol). I've gotten a good bit better since then, but what other people think of my gaming skill doesn't equate to life for me like it apparently does for you.

I mean, seriously dude... it's hilarious that now you have moved on to **** talking me in melee. Pitiful. Shows even more desperation in you trying to prove something in this discussion. And concerning my brother, Dave, he shares a lot with me. We are best friends. What he tells me, good or bad, remains in my strict confidence. and just because I have caused a classic josh meltdown here, doesn't mean that i'd ever bring him into it.

Just for info. purposes though, I've played at much, MUCH higher levels in other games than you do at smash(games aside from super smash bros, LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!). Very familiar with the tournament setting. lol.. and from my experience, I think that doing it the way I suggested is *more* fair than having a panel, although both methods are similar.

Just out of curiosity, who can/have you 4 stocked that can/has 4 stocked me? looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool. Please list them.

ps. the wii you sold me was supposed to be 100$, and it was re-arranged at $125 because you were including brawl with it. The brawl disc was too scratched to work, *******. rofl

 

[Dark Hart]

I wanna see Josh's list

Also Dorsey, josh was/is pretty good at DDR

like kinda top level

and ran large tournaments for it and such

 

[Bl@ckChris]

i think the problem isn't that it has happened. the problem is that it very well could happen.

in fact, animazement was technically part of this period, but it mattered so little that nobody even really brought it up. and the hickory tournament was also part of this period. but both situations are so problematic to this "point system" that they weren't even used in our current system. LOL.

smash skill has nothing to do with anything. both of you should be the bigger man and get over it.

dorsey, i'm not saying you're wrong. but i don't see how the fact/concept that both of these tournaments haven't happened don't attest to their potential to happen. albeit in all reality, both of those have already happened, and we kind of ignored them LOL.

 

[Dorsey]

well, it was ignored for an obvious reason then. Can adjust the pt system pretty easy to ignore it as well. Just kind of stupid that everyone of his comments is exaggerating/over-the-top, so I said the easiest thing: it's not true.. which it isn't D:

ddr has always kind of been a joke for me. My personal preference is fast paced, complex pc fps's(quake series, warsow, even tf2 is kind of cool)... which is where the most competition/prize payout is at(see quakelive). a forum random posted this of me the other day: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKLK6uV9zoY (silly .pak / textures / sounds, it's heavily modified.. not what mine looks like) ...... I have been representing USA's team for this game for quite some time now. Can link you to the squad if anyone wants..

 

[Bl@ckChris]

it isn't true that these tournaments happen orrrr that it isn't true that these tournaments should be counted?

because...they happen.

 

[Foxy]

dont let dorsey troll you for 1 second

 

[Ocean]

Tell me why the point system I suggested is bad. Show me where my fault is. lol... and I'm not embarrassed, Josh. The guy who is prone to rage about losses and is always johning, is also the guy who is more prone to getting embarrassed because he obviously cares more than anyone else. How is that for philosophy?

you know, we have a name for idiocy like this.

 

[Dorsey]

it isn't true that these tournaments happen orrrr that it isn't true that these tournaments should be counted?

because...they happen.

That the scenario he described, both of them in a ranking period, has never happened. It is what I have said specifically the whole time. The pt system can be adjusted to ignore stuff like that also, is what I meant. Plus the panel's discretion.

ocean-It's not an ad hominem because I wasn't trying to negate the truth of his statement that "I'm embarrassing myself", which he's said multiple times... I don't get embarrassed over video game discussion, and in life you'll find that the people who frequently point out supposed embarrassment in a situation like this, are because they care enough themselves to be embarrassed from it. and yeah, josh seems to care about his e-rep more than anyone. Not an ad hominem attack, just the facts of life.

 

[Bl@ckChris]

well, between march and now, the hickory tournament and animazement happened. if that's what you're saying.

unless the hickory tournament isn't a strong enough 8 man bracket for you. which it may or may not be.

 

[Dorsey]

no, I don't think that bracket quite suits the analogy for the "strong 8 man" I had in my mind, tbh... who ran the animazement tourney / was there 50 randoms that entered?

 

[Lightsyde]

There was no Melee tournament at Animazement this year. There were a few years back, and I know that the Brawl tournament last year was like that though. Most fighting game tourneys are cons are like that (2 or 3 really good players and then a lot of attendee scrubs).

It was an example of something that would break your system and force you use PR discretion while the current system would deal with it without. Why is this complicated?

Once I leave work I'm done reading this thread and I'm still consolidating everything because I've been super busy the last hour.

And please note that I bolded "If I wanted to sound like you" and then said offensive things. Then I said "But saying that stuff adds nothing to my argument, so I don't know why you think saying things about me adds anything to yours." I was illustrating why saying insulting things is useless for making a point.

For the record, I have 4 stocked all but a handful of the active players in NC within the last 6 months to year, so take your pick. 4 stocks happen and I'm not trying embarrass or start stuff with anyone; a few people have randomly 4 stocked me too. You completely missed the point I was making. And as far as dance games being a joke....lmao. I'll just let you stay clueless on that one.

EDIT: Also, I never knew there was anything wrong with the Brawl disk and you never told me. I would have happily returned the money if I would have known.

Zach: You're missing the point too. I was saying that stuff is irrelevant. *sigh*

 

[Moophobia]

Typical don't agree with me then you ****ing suck at smash and don't have a life be envious of mine. Real wish some people didn't exist

 

[Sneak8288]

Ok from both sides of the arguement I've been reading josh has been right

 

[lord karn]

I didn't leap to an assumption man, if you go back and read, it's clarified. You obviously didn't.

By the way, just for future reference: An example isn't a counterexample if it doesn't counter anything. LOOOOOOOOOOOOOL. Your example will never happen. It doesn't counter anything.

Lol, I can see a classic Josh meltdown coming up here soon, so I will "stop wasting your time".

Maybe the next one will be his "last post".

Karn-- How is that being unfair exactly, over-all? This new player got into an "unfair" situation due to a bad seed, right? Why was his seed bad?

Also, do you mean a new player, or a non-pr'd player? The seeding scale I suggested would have data for everyone, unless they didn't attend anything. And if they don't attend anything well... it would be unfair to the others that do attend stuff and work for their seed, opposed to just giving out a seed arbitrarily(lol). I would hope the panel could place someone like this in a spot though so it infringes on ALL PARTICIPANTS fairness in the least, including the actual player. If he beats people, as I said, his seeding will be better for the next tourney. I don't see how that's unfair exactly(someone having to work there way up to get ranked). I think that giving that person a great seed would be less fair than doing that... Something on the lines of what sneak said(the only piece of information I have used from sneak) in regard to labeling an inactive but skilled player with a "5". Not saying that should be it, but that's on the right track.

Also, I did not mean to come across insulting...well I did, but I was trying to make some people laugh that see the humor in the situation like me lol. You obviously don't, and I'm sorry. Just seems that effort put forth to adjusting/better the PR has been completely futile over the years.

I'll explain the situation I am talking about in detail.

There is a PR period. Various players get ranked using your system. A new tournament happens. We seed everyone based off your PRs. Some random new player enters the tournament who is pretty good (kinda like PP at his first tourney). He ends up playing the number 1 seed first or second round and loses. First round in losers he ends up playing someone who is PRd and wins. Next round he loses to another PRd player. Let's say he ends up getting 17th or 13th or something like that.

Another tournament happens in that ranking period. Same exact thing happens.

Then another tournament happens. Same exact thing happens. Ranking period is now over.

Based off your rankings, this random new player would not be ranked (unless the players in the above spots were just really inconsistent and he somehow managed to get on). So he ends up not getting ranked, probably with many of the players he beat getting on.

So next ranking period rolls around. This player gets a low seed again because he didn't make it on. Again he has to fight one of the best players first/second round. Again he ends up placing around 13th even though he may have beaten several PRd players.

The moral of the story is that this newly skilled player has to become significantly better than the players who are already PRd to make it on the list. This just seems completely unintuitive to me. If this guy is actually better than a lot of these players, which he proved by beating several of them across a few tournaments, he should ****ing be on the rankings. Not only is it unfair to him, but it's unfair to the other good players who happened to get him first or second round when they should have gotten an easier match.

You're right that it would be unfair to give him a good seed going into the first tournament he was going into. As an unproven player he deserves a low seed at first. But after he has proven himself a few times in tourney, he deserves a higher seed. Using a placement based system, he has to become way better than the currently PRd guys to have a shot at making it on the rankings because he goes into the tournament with a significant disadvantage. This just creates a system where the same people keep getting PRd and having an unfair advantage to win money.

I don't know about most sports, but I do know that competitive fencing uses something similar to the method we use.

 

[Bl@ckChris]

well, if he keeps beating pr'd people in losers bracket, they'll place even lower than noob pp. so they...probably won't get re-ranked.

but yeah...i know what you're getting at.

 

[lord karn]

You could just as easily word it as he beats one prd player in winners only

 

[Bl@ckChris]

weell, and I could say it already happens. I can't remember the last time I played you, theo, or cam. And I've never played david, ali, or dop in tourney.

but I know I keep losing to pp twitch and lozr.

definitely not saying I'm skilled player x with bracket johns. But I've been in that cycle. And you just deal with it sometimes.

 

[lord karn]

weell, and I could say it already happens. I can't remember the last time I played you, theo, or cam. And I've never played david, ali, or dop in tourney.

but I know I keep losing to pp twitch and lozr.

definitely not saying I'm skilled player x with bracket johns. But I've been in that cycle. And you just deal with it sometimes.

Yeah, you fight them early because you have a low seed. But if you get in one or two good wins (and I'm sure you had the opportunity to, like when you beat sneak), those will matter for your PR record. In the placement system they don't matter at all.

 

[~Twitch~]

chris i haven't played you in tourney in sooooo long lol.

wait did we play at the hickory tournament?

 

[0Room]

For serious that cycle does suck

 

[Dorsey]

Uhh.. yeah karn, if the guy's seeding repeatedly doesn't change for beating PR'd players, and those PR'd players' seeds don't change for losing to a "new player", then yeah, you're right....... but I am with stressing the seeding, saying that it's crucial for the pt. system's success. I said that the panel should do a lot of the seeding off of who beats who in tourney..... So are you saying that this snag would ruin the entire system, or SOMEHOW, would the seeding be able to be done right?

Sounds like this cycle happens with our current system anyway, to non-pr'd players :>

btw... there's a bunch of *****made ******s on this forum

 

[lord karn]

Uhh.. yeah karn, if the guy's seeding repeatedly doesn't change for beating PR'd players, and those PR'd players' seeds don't change for losing to a "new player", then yeah, you're right....... but I am with stressing the seeding, saying that it's crucial for the pt. system's success. I said that the panel should do a lot of the seeding off of who beats who in tourney..... So are you saying that this snag would ruin the entire system, or SOMEHOW, would the seeding be able to be done right?

Sounds like this cycle happens with our current system anyway, to non-pr'd players :>

btw... there's a bunch of *****made ******s on this forum

Well, the point of making PRs is to seed players. . . If we do what you said, we'd essentially have to remake the PRs every tournament just to seed everyone. And in doing that seeding, we would be considering set counts, not tournament placing. . .

And it doesn't really happen with our current system. Josh shot up the rankings in like two cycles. We see people come off and on the rankings constantly. The reason people see it as difficult is even though our lower leveled players are improving, most of our PR level players are still improving, too. For example, blackchris has improved a ton in the last year, and is probably better now than a lot of PRd players were a year ago, but they've improved too.

 

[Dorsey]

Chris gets a low seed repeatedly(from what I'm reading), and feels the odds are somewhat stacked against him due to always getting knocked out by pp, twitch, and lozr.... isn't that generally what your example was? aren't his chances of getting PR'd worse than the other players he listed that he seems to never meet in bracket, due to his seeding?

I'm not saying that's a gripe of mine at all. Just trying to see the difference between that and what you suggested, if there is one. and yeah, I guess we're back to what the PR represents. And if "the point of making the PRs" is to seed players, doesn't that give an advantage to currently PR'd people to get PR'd again? Isn't that exactly why you said my system was bad(since properly seeding for each tournament, ofc, was out of the question)??

I just wish someone could explain to me how, a bracket/placing is extremely unfair, in terms of the process. As in.. I want someone to point at a bracket with hypothetical seeds 1-8 and tell me which seed is unfair, or how ANY of them are in an unfair position, in whichever round, assuming their seed is correct? Where does it go wrong??

 

[lord karn]

Chris gets a low seed repeatedly(from what I'm reading), and feels the odds are somewhat stacked against him due to always getting knocked out by pp, twitch, and lozr.... isn't that generally what your example was? aren't his chances of getting PR'd worse than the other players he listed that he seems to never meet in bracket, due to his seeding?

I'm not saying that's a gripe of mine at all. Just trying to see the difference between that and what you suggested, if there is one. and yeah, I guess we're back to what the PR represents. And if "the point of making the PRs" is to seed players, doesn't that give an advantage to currently PR'd people to get PR'd again? Isn't that exactly why you said my system was bad(since properly seeding for each tournament, ofc, was out of the question)??

I just wish someone could explain to me how, a bracket/placing is extremely unfair, in terms of the process. As in.. I want someone to point at a bracket with hypothetical seeds 1-8 and tell me which seed is unfair, or how ANY of them are in an unfair position, in whichever round, assuming their seed is correct? Where does it go wrong??

I doubt he ever really plays lozr considering he doesn't really come to much. He must be eliminated by two players though. Even if he does play PP/Twitch in winners every time (even though he probably plays a more mid ranked player because he is not the lowest seeded player), he still has to lose to another person in winners bracket. Seeing as twitch/pp don't get into losers that early, that means he must have a chance to play other players, and thus gets a chance to play PRd players.

The seed you go into the tournament period with does definitely affect your ability to place well. That's what it is supposed to do, though, because players who have proven themselves should not have to play each other first round. However, in my system, as soon as a player beats anyone good they immediately become considered for the next PR (they've proven themselves). So my system affects how likely a player is to play a greater amount of sets that matter.

However, not only does your system affect a player's chance to play important sets (which i have no problem with, as that is the basic function of any PR system), but it also affects the way we interpret the data itself. In a sense, then, a placement based system counts a players seed against them twice, both in the accumulation of data (where it should count), but also in the way we interpret the data (because placement is highly affected by seed). In my system, when we look at set counts, we are not considering seeding at all.

 

[Dark Hart]

This wouldn't be a problem if we seeded through pools, but pools can be hard at NC tournies

 

[Bl@ckChris]

yeah twitch, we played at the hickory tournament. it happened so fast, i'm not surprised you don't remember.

my chances to get pr'd were limited to playing DJ's sheik every tournament back when he was around. And i think i lost to yay a lot too.

you might not think i get the lowest seed, but usually, if smith isn't around, i get pretty close to the lowest seed. like that 8 man bracket hickory tournament, i'm pretty sure me and smith were the lowest seeds lol. most people who would be seeded lower than me either don't make it to the tourneys i end up at or just don't enter *shrug*

hell, even at G6, i barely squeaked through JMH first round LOL. it coulda been him in that 7 spot and me in that 33 just as easily lol.

my chances do come and go though. i guess i'll just keep choking 2-1 vs josh and beating people who beat pr'd players.