Would you sit on your rating?
- Thread starter Morpheus
- Start date
- Status
NoPoke
Active Member
3000 that ought to be enough....
Since the logistic equation is being used as the basis for a reward system it is unlikely that any player will be able to safely sit on a rating.
You could skip a few tournaments but unless its the very last weeks of the season sitting it out is a big risk.
Since the logistic equation is being used as the basis for a reward system it is unlikely that any player will be able to safely sit on a rating.
You could skip a few tournaments but unless its the very last weeks of the season sitting it out is a big risk.
Black_jirachi
New Member
I'll sit on my rating when it's over 2600, and Spoinks fly.
No rating is "Safe" though
No rating is "Safe" though
HornetsBasketballFan
Active Member
I'd rather play all year and miss worlds, than sit on a ranking and miss out on worlds because I though Iw as safe.
meganium45
Active Member
2100 or so would be my guess for Masters.
Vince
Vince
If someone were to work out the expectation of the number of points top players would get, one could work out mathematically how likely it is for someone to win a trip (based on rankings, NOT anything else). Before anyone asks though, there is no way I'm up for that kind of calculation... also it'd be based on past performances, which may or may not be the best indicator of final positions.
To summarise - yes one can work out for some number X, what is the probability of winning a trip to worlds with that ranking. Whether you trust the maths or not is another matter...
To summarise - yes one can work out for some number X, what is the probability of winning a trip to worlds with that ranking. Whether you trust the maths or not is another matter...
KazamBolt
Active Member
My rating plummeted going 2-3!
I would never sit on my rating as I would somehow lose my invite.
SlimeyGrimey
New Member
If Canadian Nats is after US Nats again, it would be fairly easy to see if a Canadian player could afford to sit out Nats.
I don't know what I'd be comfortable to sit on until it gets closer to the end of the season when we'll have a better idea of what the high ratings will be. I would definitely sit if I thought I was safe though.
I don't know what I'd be comfortable to sit on until it gets closer to the end of the season when we'll have a better idea of what the high ratings will be. I would definitely sit if I thought I was safe though.
With a bad-luck start severely hurting a top-ranked player in 1-game swiss matches, I'd say sitting on your ranking you've work so hard (and have been somewhat lucky) to acheive, isn't so bad.
Back at the 2001 Tropical Mega Battle, my son was one of the three representatives from the US. My son was the only active player. The other two had achieved high rankings from previous years, but hadn't played Pokemon in about a year.
Personally, I think that was wrong.
Anyway, I do like how POP resets rankings after Worlds every year.
Hopefully, the local/regional qualifiers will come back next season to supplement the ranking invitation system. I think we need both to help balance out the flaws in either system.
Back at the 2001 Tropical Mega Battle, my son was one of the three representatives from the US. My son was the only active player. The other two had achieved high rankings from previous years, but hadn't played Pokemon in about a year.
Personally, I think that was wrong.
Anyway, I do like how POP resets rankings after Worlds every year.
Hopefully, the local/regional qualifiers will come back next season to supplement the ranking invitation system. I think we need both to help balance out the flaws in either system.
Flaming_Spinach
Feature Editor
My thoughts...
There is no way I'm going to miss Regionals. The prizes are just too big.
After that, however, it's a completely different story. I'd be completely willing to help judge (and not play) if it meant getting into Worlds.
The big question is, what rating do you need to be 'guaranteed' a trip to Worlds? My expert analysis says 2000 is the aproximate cutoff line (for Masters in NA).
In the 2004-5 season, only 3 people exceeded a 2000 rating, and 2 of them did it at Worlds (Jermy and Ross), so their records probably don't count if you're trying to account for ratings BEFORE worlds.
In 2005-6, there were 5, although 1 doesn't count because she apparently didn't actually attend any premier events.
So, the past 2 years lead me to believe that 2000 will be the aproximate cutoff this year.
However, there's 2 final things we have to consider:
1. There will be more events this year, with more chances to win points, scores will likely go up.
2. On the other hand, people will be alot more serious about even the most meaningless victory, likely driving scores down.
There is no way to tell how those 2 things combined will effect scores.
There is no way I'm going to miss Regionals. The prizes are just too big.
After that, however, it's a completely different story. I'd be completely willing to help judge (and not play) if it meant getting into Worlds.
The big question is, what rating do you need to be 'guaranteed' a trip to Worlds? My expert analysis says 2000 is the aproximate cutoff line (for Masters in NA).
In the 2004-5 season, only 3 people exceeded a 2000 rating, and 2 of them did it at Worlds (Jermy and Ross), so their records probably don't count if you're trying to account for ratings BEFORE worlds.
In 2005-6, there were 5, although 1 doesn't count because she apparently didn't actually attend any premier events.
So, the past 2 years lead me to believe that 2000 will be the aproximate cutoff this year.
However, there's 2 final things we have to consider:
1. There will be more events this year, with more chances to win points, scores will likely go up.
2. On the other hand, people will be alot more serious about even the most meaningless victory, likely driving scores down.
There is no way to tell how those 2 things combined will effect scores.
ZAKtheGeek
New Member
F_S, I don't think your analysis is very trustworthy. First of all, now that ranking is the primary path to Worlds, I think people would be trying a lot harder and more strategically to up their scores. Also, I'm not sure, but weren't the K-values all wacky in some previous year(s)?
ToysRUsKid
Active Member
Well, you dont have to sit out either.. U can go 3-0, 4-0 and drop.
That works too. Though its really stupid.
That works too. Though its really stupid.
Rulemaster
New Member
"Sit" on a rating=not play?
Lets see...we've got:
1. Another week of states
2. Regionals
3. Battle Road
4. Nationals
all with potentially higher K value? good luck sitting on a couple cc wins, and possibly a state. you'd be stupid to think that you're rating is "safe."
Lets see...we've got:
1. Another week of states
2. Regionals
3. Battle Road
4. Nationals
all with potentially higher K value? good luck sitting on a couple cc wins, and possibly a state. you'd be stupid to think that you're rating is "safe."
PokeWisconsin
New Member
It's stupd to drop after a good start too. Going 4-0 at a states and dropping won't get you a high rating. Winning will.
- Status