Tournament Matches being archived to Rankings

[Studstill]

We are currently processing all tournament matches ever.
To be eligible for the Rankings, tournament data must have:
The two players and their characters.
Optional:
Stage, Stock Count Initial, Stock Count Final, Video.

If submitting a whole tournament, just post a link to the information and we`ll process it.
If submitting a few matches, just link to the video or post the information here.

Matches from the following are already in:
Genesis 2
Smashacre Gluttony
Smashacre Frostbite
APEX 13
APEX 12
RBR 13
BHB 1
Sweet XII
Another Castle
Zenith 13

 

[clubbadubba]

unclear how you got character data for this. unless you only took matches from videos, char data is unavailable and players will switch characters midset.

on another note I have lots of data that could potentially be used for this if you don't care about character data

 

[Chaostatic]

Is this not the same this as the Elo rating? Which reminds me, doesn't Elo need to be updated?

 

[Studstill]

We`re just chunking the data into the modified Danisen system that`s already in place. Mostly because I`m interested to see what happens, if the system can produce accurate results given a healthy amount of data.

Clubba, nice eye: Yes, this is match specific. 'Sets' is not really standardized as a data source, we feel that would cause too much un-accounted for variance (4 stocks bo1 vs 5 stocks bo7, etc), and more problematically American tournaments tend to not be character locked, as you mentioned, making it impossible to assign the win to a player-character. Does any of your data have characters? Unfortunately, we are basically married to the idea of player-character > player, so just a bracket or results are usually unusable.

Chaos, this is different from the ELO. We are talking with Clubba about some kind of hybrid, but that`s not a priority to either of us I think, perhaps Clubba can expand on that; the two systems aren`t mutually exclusive right now, and could possibly merge in the future.

 

[clubbadubba]

Is this not the same this as the Elo rating? Which reminds me, doesn't Elo need to be updated?

others developed a different ranking system. As far as I'm aware Elo is up to date with the exception of some Brazil tournies. If stuff is missing please post in the Elo thread what needs to be updated


stud, I think you are shooting yourself in the foot with character data requirement, you won't get enough data

 

[Studstill]

We have 500 matches already, plus the 700 or so played on site. It sucks to not be able to input brackets, but that is the cost to pay for higher accuracy and more meaningful data.
Edit: We really are stoked with the player-char system. It`s just so much better of a metric!
Actually, every match with a video meets these requirements naturally, so the only foot-shooting on that is if I do it all myself. :D Fun times, watching smash! It actually doesn`t take that long, since you can just skip to the end, maybe 30 seconds a match. So I could do 100-150 matches an hour, not counting find video time. If anyone has a video group from a tourney that would be a great link to post, or if you just say have a link to a video of your match, then we can find all the other ones from that tourney.

 

[Shears]

When I finish the tournament app we will have the capacity to store tournament info and update with matches automatically.

 

[Cobrevolution]

make it separate from online, it's only fair.

 

[Studstill]

I don`t understand what you mean. Fair to who?

 

[Shears]

He means tournament matches should be weighted differently, or held to their own ranking values than online matches because tournament matches are taken very seriously and are played when people have done significant practicing and are playing at their best, while online matches are played a lot more leisurely even if they are for rank.

 

[Cobrevolution]

i mean you should literally separate peoples' rankings from one another, in the same vein as the elo. yes, tourney matches should have more weight, but they should not be in the same category as online matches. they should only outweigh mm's and fests.

it's silly to mix them, because then you'll wind up with something like kero and frogles in A tier. they will never play, and they don't ever play the same people, yet they'd be in the same rank.

 

[Studstill]

Again, unfair to who?
If you are going to come on here solely for the purpose of saying that we`re doing it wrong, then at least answer my question. Who cares if Frog and Kero never play. What does that have anything to do with it.
And it isn`t 'silly', actually, I`d rather not get into it.

 

[Cobrevolution]

unfair to everyone involved.

you're saying someone playing in a console tourney match, a console money match, a smash fest, 1 frame of delay friendly, 2 frames of delay tourney match, 3 frames p2p ranking match...all those games are going to count towards one person's individual rank.

that isn't fair to the player himself, nor to someone who doesn't have console or online capabilities.

so, you can go ahead and weigh frog's online matches and kero's console matches, but don't place them in the same category of generalized rankings. there's no reason not to separate them, what with how many people only play one or the other and how many of those people are not exposed to the same population spread the others.

kero does not play the people frog does. frog does not play people kero does. and they're both (hypothetically) in the same tier, without having the option of playing each other or each others' opponents. this leads to an inaccurate assessment.

i don't see a reason to mix online and console.

 

[Studstill]

"Unfair to everyone" doesn`t even make sense. Look this is a thread for posting tournament matches to be ranked and archived. Go make your own separate rankings site. I`m tired of having to defend myself at every ****ing turn. I mean, I know I posted this in A FORUM, but I definitely didn`t post it to have Rob come in and say it`s silly and wrong.

 

[rjgbadger]

don't mix console skill with online skill

 

[Herbert Von Karajan]

don't mix console skill with online skill

 

[MrMarbles]

i agree you shouldn't mix the two. online matches have delay and often lag spikes depending on whose playing and this can definitely have an effect on matches. also some people play better on console then online and vise versa. See Near and hipstur's placement at apex 2014 as an example

 

[Studstill]

If people want to play online the site will accept those as games of Super Smash Bros 64.
If people feel that online is not going to represent their skill at Super Smash Bros 64, then don`t play online.
We have no part in that decision. I`m not mixing ANYTHING. We`re taking ranked tournament games, and ranked online matches of the same game and NOT splitting them, due to the fact that THAT is unfair, in almost any system based on tourneys benefits Rob Stone and others in the NE.

But honestly man, I`m not even sure why I post on here. You guys like, have it all down, since every idea I have gets shot down as silly, or wrong. Yet there are no competing ideas. And haven`t been for quite some time. Karajan`s Japanese rankings, of which by far I was the biggest cheerleader, got immediately derailed by irrelevant rules, like point locking. So Shears and I fixed the rules, which I`M REALLY PROUD OF, and automated it, man, there is even kills per stock stats, and so much more awesome. I really want accurate rankings. I want to know what lives boom should spot me for a fair match. This is standard stuff in any game, objectively knowing the skill of an opponent, and I`m just trying to do whatever I can to make that happen for my favorite game of all time. The low tier tourney was so obvious, like never have one again. Just set a time period, like a month, and see who can get the highest. I`ve already said I`ll give 20$ to the first person to A Tier, I`ll expand that to 20$ for a low Tier A character, period. Is this shameless bribery, yes. Do I think that 'community' inertia is to blame? Yes, and thus the bribing.
Once we get it actually launched, which has been delayed as I assumed Skype and SB would provide a fine early adopter core, we could have a standing prize every month, or even week, like 10$ to the highest player, etc. Wouldn`t it be so cool to have, sentences like "Boom has been at the top for 34 weeks!" instead of just gibberish and subjective opinion.

 

[Sangoku]

Again you're being over sensitive and you take things too personally.

Online vs console has always been a sensitive subject and the consensus has always been not to mix them up. If you dig players tier list threads you'll always see there's one thread for console and one for online.

The argument is that console skill is not directly proportional to online skill. Of course if you're a monster on console you'll be good online, but some players/characters/playstyles are more suited to online play. Therefore ignoring that fact could be perceived wrong, since it wouldn't accurately represent console skill.

 

[Studstill]

Perhaps, I tend to take things personally. That being said:
I`m really tired of people telling me things I already know. That everyone knows, as if it were a debate point. Clubba objected and was responded to, Chaos mentioned something totally different and I was happy to inform. I`m talking about a match archive for tournament matches, but that immediately gets ignored and some 40000th time debate about "online vs. console" takes over the thread.

But further, I tire of the tone of this forum, to clarify my attitude:

I`m trying to do something for a Nintendo game that I love.
I`m trying to share that with the SSB 64 'community' as I am a cartridge-carrying member. To this goal I created this thread to let interested people know about it and save me some time on finding all the data.
If you want to help, awesome! Want to make sure I get that tournament you won at, awesome!
If you have an better idea, or think of a way I could better achieve my goals , awesome!
This is something I`ve dreamed about since before most of you even knew about Smash 64. So when I post threads on the various parts of it and they are consistently met with "This is bad because (one reason or another" with usually a single sentence I get offended. In that sense, Sangoku, thanks for your response. This 'sensitive subject' I wonder, why is it so? Doesn`t everyone understand online vs. console? Again, the online games being talked brought up are I assume the ones already logged on the site. Those are ranked matches, and if you all want to keep online and console split, than go on. I prefer one big tent, it builds a higher base for the truly skilled people to stand on. I`d wouldn`t even say non-OG controllers are illegal, even though I think that`s an abomination to use other ones.
Anyway, sooooooooo
How would a split system look? Except for tourneys, most people have a very small group of people to play with on console. Which is the biggest hurdle to having a rankings system based on console, a problem Rob and other NE people seem happy to ignore. Not everyone has Stef around to whip up a scene. So online is the primary method for new players and most old ones to play SSB, regardless of any other factors. Yes, I wish you could play console online. But you can`t. This doesn`t mean I`m unaware of the difference, and I get aggravated when people tell me **** I obviously know, like that online /=/ console.
So what was y`all`s solution? Mine is to say quit crying because someone beat you and grow up. Also, of course characters are different online, that the game is different with delay, so what? That`s how it is. And that`s where the bulk of play is, for worse, for sure, but again: reality. Shears and I created a totally automated site for online rankings, and afaik the three people up there saying to keep it separate never used the 'separate system for online' ONCE. So yeah, I get a little touchy when phase 2 rolls around and they say "No do it the way you already tried that I know all about". Again, what was y`all`s solution?

 

[Shears]

Its important to not pay attention to rankings and numbers or whatever right now. It is important that all the data and tournaments and matches and everything is consolidated and organized to be easily sortable and searched. Thats step one. We can start worrying about formulas and separating console and online matches later. Lets first get all the data. You can say you don't agree with the numbers or formulas or ranks or whatever, but how can anyone disagree with consolidating information and organizing it? If you don't like it then you don't have to contribute, just ignore it and move on, but going out of your way to bash it and bring it down is childish and silly.

"I think what you're doing Studstill is stupid" Fine, let him be stupid then, but don't make it harder for him to be stupid. If you don't care then just ignore.

"I prefer ELO because it was here first" No one is saying ELO is bad, but just because something was first doesn't mean its the best. No one is trying to one up Clubba or ask for ELO to be taken down either. Both can be used for measuring players. In baseball they had ERA to measure a pitchers skill, but that wasn't the best so they created WHIP, but that wasn't the best so they created FIP, and that wasn't the best so they created xFIP. ELO is just a statistic and what Studstill is trying to bring in is more statistics. Its taking a sabermetric approach to smash

"Online and console need to be separated for rankings" Fine, have that argument later, debate it when its time. Just give the kid the information he wants. If you are so unsupportive of his end goal that its existence would make you lose sleep at night, then go ahead and make it more difficult for him, but if its not interfering with your life, then either help him out or ignore him.

"I think its just stupid because its stupid and I just don't like it because" Stop being a pessimist, stop being a cynic. This isn't about me or you or Studstill, its about smash and trying to bring something to the community. If you think theres a great way to create rankings then go do it and make it.

"Frogles and Kero are the same rank" I honestly don't believe having people post their top 20 lists and then averaging everyones answers in a thread is the best way to do it, but I don't think its pointless either. Those are power rankings, not standings. Standings is more of what Studstill is trying to do and the idea behind standings is its objective. Power rankings are subjective. The Redskins can win the ****ty NFC east and have a record as good as the Packers because they won the same amount of games and performed in what is, in theory, a balanced league. They would have the same spot in the standings but then the power rankings can be observed to give the eye test to the standings and see who is better than their standing. Standings are "fair" and thats why they exist. Frogles and Kero can have the same spot in the standings, then in the smashboards player power rankings thread everyone can vote to throw Kero up top. Having smash standings isn't perfect but neither is power rankings. Its just another metric that uses actual matches and results vs peoples opinion to show where people rank.

"Its too much work and time" Who cares? Its not your work or your time. He wants to slave over it then let him. Hes almost 30, hes an adult, let him do what he wants and stop trying to discipline him.

 

[Cobrevolution]

I`m not mixing ANYTHING.

We`re taking ranked tournament games, and ranked online matches

so you're mixing them

I want to know what lives boom should spot me for a fair match.

please let this be a joke

The low tier tourney was so obvious, like never have one again. Just set a time period, like a month, and see who can get the highest

stop saying things like this, it makes you sound ignorant...moreso than before, anyway

match archive for tournament matches

and using it to further your idea of "rankings"

I prefer one big tent, it builds a higher base for the truly skilled people to stand on.

if your goal has to do with the community and not "studstill's own agenda" then you should be taking into account that people generally do not want the two stats to be mixed together.

my personal reasoning: i am one of those people who plays worse online than on console. therefore, my losses are generally more frustrating because of random factors like delay and lag spikes. my wins do not feel as justified, either, because i feel the same way for my opponent - he is hindered as well. now, why would i want those records to be mixed in with my console records? why would anyone want that? hell, even numbers alone should have you second guessing this. it presents inaccurate skill judgments.

i'm currently the last place occupant on the ONLINE ELO (out of 34 users), and 39th on console (out of 307 users). mixed, i'm 103rd.

this is an example of why it's a bad idea to MIX.

also: including someone like maliki in the rankings was downright silly in my opinion, because, realistically, only ONE person could challenge him. he doesn't play online. and if you can't challenge players (which is a pretty important part of the website, unless i'm mistaken), why bother?


shears: it's best to nip it in the bud now instead of later, if everything has been meshed together and would be time consuming to sort out. clearly, people do not like having the numbers mixed. gather all the data you want, sure, but take peoples' criticisms into account for future reference.

standings vs power rankings: it's difficult. if you're basing a "standings" system on just wins-losses in a tier, then you can get skewed results - ie, studstill is in c tier, purely because of the amount of games he has played. and jaime is in start. lol.

if he wants to work and do all this stuff, fine, i don't care, it's his desire. BUT when people vocalize their opinions and he responds how he usually does, it's more likely to crash and burn.

 

[Shears]

I just talked to him about this. Nothing is definitively getting mixed. There would be a console rank and an online rank, and in addition to these two, a universal rank that will use a complex formula that is yet to be determined to try and find a balanced way of comparing the two and having everything reflected into one list. Even alongside these rankings, there could be their respective ELO ranking as well. Think of a pitcher, they typically use ERA for the standings, but next to each is their WHIP ranking and FIP and everything else. They didn't do away with any stats, they just added more. You can sort a pitchers stats by day/night games, indoor/outdoor parks, NL/AL stadiums, etc. Why would it be a bad thing to put everything we already have in a structured organized, consolidated site and add more to it? Nothing is really being changed, things are just being added. I think when its all said and done, the concerns that are currently being raised will be forgotten and ignored because it will turn out better than what everyone currently expects.

 

[Cobrevolution]

There would be a console rank and an online rank

therein lies my agreement and probably the agreement of many others

when you say day/night games, indoor outdoor ETC

my thoughts point to: sorting by stage, stock, character, winner's bracket, loser's bracket, frames of delay, etcetcetc. which is a lot, ya know? but if that's what ya'll wanna do, by all means, go for it. i just think it's a bad idea to boost or reduce someone's potential ranking by mixing and matching, whether it's a lot or a little.

 

[clubbadubba]

Edit: We really are stoked with the player-char system. It`s just so much better of a metric!

I wouldn't say better so much as it portrays different things. Players generally do their best to avoid bad match-ups in character selection, so comparative rankings will probably have some inaccuracy. If I'm remembering your system correctly (forgive me if I'm not, too lazy to look it up right now), to rank up you just have to beat player-characters ranked higher than you a certain number of times. So a falcon player could work his way up the ranks without ever having to beat a kirby. Whereas going on a player basis instead of character, players are forced to overcome bad match-ups in order to climb the rankings. Don't get me wrong, it is definitely cool data to have and has its own merit, but I would be careful in assuming that it tells the whole story.

Hopefully you guys can get the data easily in the future when the stuff is done.

I would also like to state my opinions just cuz its america and i can:

1) Only tourney matches should be considered, and MAYBE money matches, because it's the only time both players are serious.

2) Console and Online should be separately ranked. They are very different. For that matter, online 1 frame vs online 5 frames are also extremely different. Very tough to compare and doesn't make much sense to do so imo.

Take from that what you will, just offering my opinion. It's not meant to be personal in any way.


Also, would be dope to have a stat sheet while commentating, something like player A is 60-40 in this matchup on this stage blah blah blah.

 

[Studstill]

Jesus you really do drink your own Koolaid. "[N]ip it in the bud", do you read what you write? "Including someone like Maliki in the site was downright silly"

The current system is damn near flawless, I`m in C Tier because I beat people to get there. Jaime is in Start because he hasn`t reported beating anyone to get out.
Again, you only care about yourself and are blind to anyone else`s concerns. Maliki plays Smash. He registered for the site. Who are you to tell people who can and can`t be ranked? Who can and can`t play Smash? As far as we at the site are concerned, anyone two people with access to Smash can report matches, because what the **** are you even on? Half the stuff you say dude, I don`t even...what was confusing about boom spotting me lives? And couldn`t you take the hint to **** off out of the thread so the people who care can go back to talking about Smash, instead of how Cobr sucks online and it`s not fair.....in fact, what a crock of ****. Who can you beat IRL that beats you online? Doubtful there`s an answer to that one.

Right on Clubba, can you expand on that first para? The part about player-char being less than the full picture? Or did you mean the comparitive thing? Thanks!
As far as the site system goes
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IhfcuJUVnY5NZNm5fqy7aMTFAW1SplABex0hwRWT2pU/edit
You got it close. Yeah theoretically you could cherry pick characters, like avoid Kirby`s with your Falcon, at least when talking about online. Would send a pretty clear message of fear, but IRL probably would never happen. I expect the higher tiers to be the most accurate, some great players few heavyweights and with the champions having all 12.

 

[caneut]

Community is small, we don't need rankings.

 

[Cobrevolution]

The current system is damn near flawless, I`m in C Tier because I beat people to get there. Jaime is in Start because he hasn`t reported beating anyone to get out.

but you could pick and choose who you beat, as clubba said. which is the issue. and was not present in pointlocking, tbh.

Maliki plays Smash. He registered for the site. Who are you to tell people who can and can`t be ranked? Who can and can`t play Smash?

what? maliki can't play anyone other than stranded. narwhal can't challenge him, cuz narwhal 1) doesn't play console with maliki and 2) maliki doesn't play online. so. not sure what you don't understand.

what was confusing about boom spotting me lives?

that's literally the dumbest thing you can do, that's why i thought it was a joke. nobody should be spotted lives in smash, the **** LOLS

And couldn`t you take the hint to **** off out of the thread so the people who care can go back to talking about Smash

so rob comes in with an opinion, studstill doesn't like it. other people voice the same opinion, and studstill doesn't understand why. and i'm the dumb one.

Who can you beat IRL that beats you online?

marbles, vouch for me here.

 

[Studstill]

It`s not that I dislike your 'opinions', it`s that what you say is really, really dumb (2) or just simply not true(1), or a combination of both(3).

(1) "was not present in pointlocking, tbh."

Not true. Point locking effectively created smaller tiers inside of tiers, a systemic flaw. That`s what a Tier is. The points are just there for knowing if you advance a rank or not. The problem you speak of doesn`t exist, but if it did it would be present in either system.

(2)
what? maliki can't play anyone other than stranded. narwhal can't challenge him, cuz narwhal 1) doesn't play console with maliki and 2) maliki doesn't play online. so. not sure what you don't understand.

I don`t understand why you think we should exclude people from Smash Bros. Why maliki can only play with Stranded, or what you are talking about narwhal is irrelevant. It`s a website for a video game, dude, not an exclusive clubhouse. Yikes, get a grip.

(3)
[what was confusing about boom spotting me lives?]
"that's literally the dumbest thing you can do, that's why i thought it was a joke. nobody should be spotted lives in smash, the **** LOLS"

Where you abused by people who spotted lives? Pretty standard way to handicap most competition.

 

[clubbadubba]

Sure. Take into consideration that I'm assuming all data is FROM TOURNEY SETS, because imo that is the only stuff worth rating. This is important because in these scenarios players do not have a choice in who they play.

I will speak from my own experience. I am a falcon main, with a pika secondary. When I play tourney matches, I avoid playing falcon against players who have good kirby's. I will avoid blind picking falcon and 1st picking falcon when I can help it. I would only 2nd pick falcon once I know they haven't chosen kirby. Because of this, I am statistically much less likely to lose with falcon, and so my falcon ranking would eventually be higher than what it would have been had I only ever played falcon. So a player's character ranking is a reflection not only of how good that player's character is, but also when they choose to play that character. Those choices are not going to be uniform for every player, so at the end of the day it is really tough to compare even the same character for 2 different players. Maybe there's player B, another falcon main, only he has more balls than me and goes falcon all day every day even against kirby. Maybe he has better win percentages vs every character with falcon than I do, but he loses to kirby a lot, so much so that he is stagant in the rankings, while I continue to climb with my falcon by avoiding losses in bad matchups. At this point, even though he outperformed me in all 11 other matchups with falcon, his failure in the 12th matchup makes him lower ranked than me. Even though my success at the same matchup is untested and could very well be even worse than his, my falcon has achieved a higher rank simply by not playing tough matchups.

Again, its still useful and interesting data to have, its just not the end all be all of determing who has the better character X. By ignoring characters and using players only, this avoidance of tough matches is impossible. However, then the rankings would represent how well a player performs under the competitive ruleset, which is what the ELO tries to do, as opposed to how well they perform in each individual game.

More meaningful than character specific rankings for each player would be matchup specific rankings, however this would require a lot more data.

 

[Cobrevolution]

why you think we should exclude people from Smash Bros. Why maliki can only play with Stranded, or what you are talking about narwhal is irrelevant. It`s a website for a video game, dude, not an exclusive clubhouse. Yikes, get a grip.

i believe you are being dumb on purpose

i am not "excluding" anyone. explain to me HOW narwhal can play maliki. go on. please.

Pretty standard way to handicap most competition.

oh but you're boom's level so you shouldn't be spotted lives

really though, that just enforces bad habits. it's scrub mentality to think other players should handicap themselves for fairness.

 

[MrMarbles]

but you could pick and choose who you beat, as clubba said. which is the issue. and was not present in pointlocking, tbh.


what? maliki can't play anyone other than stranded. narwhal can't challenge him, cuz narwhal 1) doesn't play console with maliki and 2) maliki doesn't play online. so. not sure what you don't understand.


that's literally the dumbest thing you can do, that's why i thought it was a joke. nobody should be spotted lives in smash, the **** LOLS


so rob comes in with an opinion, studstill doesn't like it. other people voice the same opinion, and studstill doesn't understand why. and i'm the dumb one.


marbles, vouch for me here.

he speaks truth. We pretty much go even online but on console i couldn't take a game

 

[Shears]

Again, there is no doing away with ELO. I don't get how people are so opposed to having additional statistics. I have a common sense brilliant idea, you can use results from all the characters a player uses to get the players overall rank! Who would've thought that data can be averaged? Seriously, this isn't that hard to think about. In a tournament you have X matches with falcon and Y with pika. Your falcon wins more so his rank would be higher than your pika rank, but when you average the two characters your player rank is what it would be had you used simple player rankings and ignored player-character rankings. Your method, rank a player by the Z matches they won, our method rank the player by X matches won with falcon, Y matches won with pika, and (X+Y)=Z matches won by the player. Not only is your preferred ranking covered, there is additional information and rankings to get a more detailed look at how they got to Z. Player cards and stat sheets are on the agenda, so if that interests you, all the data will be needed to form accurate statistics. The argument of what is worth ranking is a valid one to have and I agree there are significant differences between online and console. But like you can look up an athletes preseason, season, and postseason stats, you could look up a smashers online and console stats, tourney and friendly stats, money match and 12 char battle stats, so on and so forth. In the dark ages of baseball they thought it was silly to look at the stats of a left handed batters average with a 1-2 count at night against a left handed pitcher getting a 2 seam fastball high outside. They thought that was just coincidence and too much to look at it and didn't paint the picture well and and their aggregate batting average was all that mattered. Now, those kind of statistics is what people make careers out of and its every bit as important as the batting average of a season. They still have the players batting average, they also have their average in ever pitch situation they face, because these stats matter and improve the game.

SOMEONE PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME HOW HAVING MORE INFORMATION AND DATA IS A BAD THING IF HAVING THAT DATA DOES NOT INTERFERE OR NEGLECT ANY OF THE DATA AND INFORMATION THAT IS CURRENTLY BEING USED?

If anyone can give a valid answer then you have me beat I'll send you $10 or give it to you at Zenith if you're the first one (I will actually pay out, I'm not a broke ass deadbeat). If you can't then your position is either to abstain or support and that choice is up to you. But really, why are you all trying to stop this from happening? Are you all just self deprecating emo @ rjgbadger who just try to pull everything down and are resistant to change and improvement because you fear you won't fit in with it or it will expose a truth about you that the current system does a good job ignoring? Stop being anti everything. Stop with the "In my short sightedness and stubborness I see a possibility of an unknown that I'm going to imagine is a flaw and instead of fixing one little hole I'm going to throw away everything" mentality. You don't not buy a car because there is a vulnerability in the tires where one could go flat if someone stabbed it with a knife. No, you ignore the slim possibility of a flaw and buy the car because its more useful than any trouble it could cause and if that flaw is exposed and your tire does go flat, you fix it and get a new tire. Really, I need someone to explain how my vision of this is a bad thing especially considering the time and effort to gather it all will be done by someone other than me or you. Studstill is gathering all the data, Studstill is wasting his time, Studstills time wasted is not directly proportional to your time wasted. If all this is a vendetta against Studstill or you don't want him to succeed because it could be fruitful and you would be jealous that he would be a positively identifiable figure in the community, then grow up. This isn't middle school with gossip and drama and bullies. We're not the PM boards, the average age of players here is greatly over 18. Everyone needs to act like adults when it comes to these types of discussions that are to build the community.

 

[Saltsizzle]

I feel like this can be solved by just adding an option for either online or console to the reporting of matches similar to reporting level played on and stocks lefts

 

[Herbert Von Karajan]

You should just do the actual japanese ranking tha J-SNAKE does.

Step -1: Learn how to quote on the forums.

Step 0: Have people in this community take you as seriously as people in Japan take J-SNAKE.

Step 1: Use the same system that was originally set up, but instead of letting players play when they wanted, hold regular round robin ranked matches for people in a certain level.

The advantage the japanese have is that they all get very few frames to each other. J-SNAKE joins the matches as a 3rd player and streams + commentates the matches.

Honestly, this system wont work well here, mostly because of how bad online is. It went very well for a while until it moved to the website, then people lost interest.

IMO, because the community is so small, the best ranking system is probably an Erdos Number style of ranking, based on the best players for each region, and only use tournament matches. Isai for north america, Gerson for peru, and Jouske for japan. I'll make a thread for this, though did something similar in the past.

 

[Shears]

It uses the same formula and rules that you outlined in the thread with the only exception being players starting in START/F tier instead of C tier. Other than that, the rules are effectively the same. In regards to a round robin schedule, that would be great, but the players interest and reliability to follow through with that is something I'm skeptical of. The interest in the thread was beginning to die, then we made the website, interest sky rocketed and we had like 450 matches reported in a month or so, then interest died again. I don't think it has to do with the functionality or ease of use or rules, I think it has to do with how easily bored and excited people here get. If you have other formulas or systems you think would be good, I'm all ears. We have the data, thats the important thing. Studstill is acquiring more data. This is just data, it isn't statistics, it isn't a ranking, it isn't a standing, it isn't anything of interpretation, it is simply data. It is records of each match ever admitted to being played with the players involved, the characters they used, the stocks they played on, the stage they played on, and the stocks they won by. That data can be interpreted in any way possible. Erdos, Danisen, ELO, Japanese style, or any other thing we can think of and any new system we can design. This thread is not as much about bashing a system or thinking yours or someone elses is better, its about consolidating data. I repeat, CONSOLIDATING DATA. We want to debate statistics and systems and which we should use, we can do that at a later time. Lets get the data first. Lets build the smash library. This is about getting all the books for the library, not whether or not the dewey decimal system is the best way to stack them.

 

[KoRoBeNiKi]

3 lists

online elo

offline elo or w/e youre gonna use

mix of the two.

and if people think that online is so bad, go to more offline events that arent apex/zenith. melee/barlw/pj:m have weeklies that get as many people as most large 64 events.

 

[Maliki]

i believe you are being dumb on purpose

i am not "excluding" anyone. explain to me HOW narwhal can play maliki. go on. please.

I'm not capable of playing online at my house or would want to if I could.

But if I had to play narwhal or wanted to I could ask stranded to let me play online at his house in order to play narwhal.

The chances of me ever playing online are slim to none.