Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Premier Ratings/Rankings changes!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pablo said:
10- and 11-14 already get more invites to Worlds, they can do with some losses to Masters Division players.
Click to expand...

Pablo, I'd reccomend you not comment on that which you do not know.

EVERY age group is receiving 64 invites to Worlds. In some cases, those invites come through different means, such as more invites going to the Juniors division through Ratings.

Thanks,
Dave
 
Like many ideas, it seems good in theory, but not quite so much in practise. Unfortunately, no one seems to have a convincing solution to Lia's problem. Of course for 70% of people it's good, but that doesn't make it hurt any less if you're in the other 30.

If implemented at the beginning of the next season, there would be far less justification to complain. As I understand it, people may be losing points because of who they were matched up against... it will be interesting to see if anyone loses invites over this.

The other ideas were very good though
 
How is anyone, with Cities not yet completed, figuring that they ALREADY had an invite to 'lose'? How is anyone figuring they've LOST an invite with this change, with 3/4s of the tourneys in the season still to come?

'mom
 
dogma,

Lias youngest is currently the #1 ranked player in Europe. Whilst her son in the Seniors is #4 in his age group.

So even though they both probably lost points back to their older age group opponents, they are still in an enviable position.

Go go Lia and family!
 
'Mom, I disagree, respectfully.

At this point there were a potential of 16 tourneys (more or less) that one could have made if they travelled.

Few, if any players (none that I know) did this, so let's say we had 8 tourneys so far for a "serious player".

Taking that same rationale to mind, most players, on average will hit 2 states, some more, some less.

Then most will hit, at most, 1 Regional.

Then we will have Battlezones, which, OK, are TBA, but let;s assume you can hit 4 BZs, and then your Nationals.

At this point, we are looking at one-half of the season done.

A few more ratings points on the back half for some, but, man, a lot has been put under the bridge!

I would agree that noone has won or lost an invite yet, but young Mr. Grafton seems to be well on his way (1980+).

Just my thoughts, talk to you soon.

Vince
 
NoPoke said:
dogma,

Lias youngest is currently the #1 ranked player in Europe. Whilst her son in the Seniors is #4 in his age group.

So even though they both probably lost points back to their older age group opponents, they are still in an enviable position.

Go go Lia and family!
Click to expand...

Ooooooooooooooh! I never knew that. Well I still stand by what I said, although don't quite understand why she's being so adamant about it then. Thanks for putting me straight :wink:
 
Parents will always defend their kids from any perceived wrong.

It is what we do.

Sometimes we are not correct in our perspective, and maybe a bit over-zealous, but we will always defend our kids.

Vince
 
i do agree with leonners and higumaotoshi and all that think this isn't the good thing to do.

because i have a younger brother that is senior. 2 weeks ago in france he beats the 2nd ranked master player in europe. and he beats a lot other master in all the tourneys we made. so i think this isn't the right way to go. he lost a lot of points with this.

i think that if we meet a outside category player if we win we earn points but if we lose we don't lose points.

i think it's just unfair and not honest.

hope you, pui, will arrange this soon
 
Ok this is a great step in the right direction. I was wondering since these will go retroactive for those younger players that did actually beat some Masters players would those points not be registered either?
 
dogma said:
Ooooooooooooooh! I never knew that. Well I still stand by what I said, although don't quite understand why she's being so adamant about it then. Thanks for putting me straight :wink:
Click to expand...


Dogma - I don't have to "lobby" for my kids, they don't need my help.
However there are kids who are hurt by the way tournaments are done at this moment.
I do what I have done for over 3 years now.
Pointing on possible problems and on guaranteed problems.
All I wanted was the same opportunities and chances for everybody who plays this game.

I learned the hard way that many times it's not appreciated if you warn people for what could come.
I don't know why, but it seems it's better to let things fail and repair afterwards iso trying to prevent.
Sad but true.
 
Rainbowgym said:
I learned the hard way that many times it's not appreciated if you warn people for what could come.
Click to expand...

We have an expression in the US: "Shooting the messenger"
As in: "He shot the messenger" or "Don't shoot the messenger"
 
meganium45 said:
'Mom, I disagree, respectfully.

At this point there were a potential of 16 tourneys (more or less) that one could have made if they travelled.

Few, if any players (none that I know) did this, so let's say we had 8 tourneys so far for a "serious player".

Taking that same rationale to mind, most players, on average will hit 2 states, some more, some less.

Then most will hit, at most, 1 Regional.

Then we will have Battlezones, which, OK, are TBA, but let;s assume you can hit 4 BZs, and then your Nationals.

At this point, we are looking at one-half of the season done.

A few more ratings points on the back half for some, but, man, a lot has been put under the bridge!

I would agree that noone has won or lost an invite yet, but young Mr. Grafton seems to be well on his way (1980+).

Just my thoughts, talk to you soon.

Vince
Click to expand...

It's looking more and more like someone won't be running any Battle ROADS.....

;)

Dave
 
SD PokéMom said:
How is anyone, with Cities not yet completed, figuring that they ALREADY had an invite to 'lose'? How is anyone figuring they've LOST an invite with this change, with 3/4s of the tourneys in the season still to come?

'mom
Click to expand...

Well, having driven to over 13 CC so far, this is off base a bit. Getting that foundation of points setup is critical to the rest fo the season.

We cna og to 3 States, but cine you earned xx points during cities, we can afford to not go to this States so we can apply that $$ to our Nats trip if you dont win one.

Maybe it is just me, but I would tink this is how a lot of parents will think!

Concur with Vince! A good start can assist for a mediocre finish!

~Fish~
 
Sorry for not following the flow of the thread, necessarilly...

Well, actually, I did read the updates.
Beforehand.
None of it applies (or worries me, for that matter) to me because I have not played cross-age division in a tournament
However, somehow, my ratings have suffered greatly, dropping over 40 points.
(I am referring to my locked thread.)

On the given topic, I don't agree much.
As suggested by my sig, it is highly possible for a 10- to have a higher IQ than that of a 11-14.
Therefore, when a 10- is forced to play a 11-14 in a premier rated tournament (especially since/if the 10- will be playing the immediate lower of the 11-14), no party should be penalized or rewarded specially.
On a side note, a 10- has the exact same amount of "luck" as a 11-14 or even a 15+ player.
I know some may find it SO hard to believe, but it's true.
 
eI_at10s said:
Sorry for not following the flow of the thread, necessarilly...

Well, actually, I did read the updates.
Beforehand.
None of it applies (or worries me, for that matter) to me because I have not played cross-age division in a tournament
However, somehow, my ratings have suffered greatly, dropping over 40 points.
(I am referring to my locked thread.)
Click to expand...


Your rating was highly affected because of the opponents you played. It's a snowball effect. You may not have played out but people you played have and since you probably won your matches against them- it takes back the points you earned from their rating of which wasn't a true rating.
 
i think that if we meet a outside category player if we win we earn points but if we lose we don't lose points.
Click to expand...


That would not work.



Think of it from the Masters perspective. If one of them gets paired down, now they can win 0 points if they win, or lose 16 (arbitrary average number) if they lose the game.

You are suggesting that the Masters player has a 100% chance of winning the game, which ELO says is impossible.



With this suggestion, even if a Senior goes 19-1 against Masters players, they still end up WINNING POINTS.
 
Professor Dav said:
Pablo, I'd reccomend you not comment on that which you do not know.

EVERY age group is receiving 64 invites to Worlds. In some cases, those invites come through different means, such as more invites going to the Juniors division through Ratings.

Thanks,
Dave
Click to expand...

Yes, but it still means the same thing: North America's 15+ will not get the same opportunities for their invites via rankings.

When I say "more love towards 10- and 11-14" I mean that they are more concerned with those divisions and their problems rather than the 15+.Don't get me wrong, the new additions to the rankings are very positive,but the problem I've mentioned is still there.

Its true that the 10- and 11-14 divisions do bring a lot of money in,but I would wager that the 15+ brings in more than both combined,or at least rivals the combined amount by a close margin.(I could name a few examples off the top of my head of certain adults that buy CASES of sets but are childless)Summing everything up: props for fixing ratings,don't forget 15+ though.

I know some of you may or may not like what I have to say, but I felt the need to elaborate on my previous statement.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top