The Super-Duper-Titan Tournament! (Season 1) - Round 1.5

[TheBitPilot]

I'm only 72nd right now but would love to participate if you aren't able to fill all of the spots. -TheBitPilot

[CombatEX]

Gfich Wrote:P1noyboypj

haha Gfich, that was what I was thinking too =P

(11-15-2012 05:27 AM)GreatGonzales Wrote:  Hey CombatEX/Gfich, I had a thought about how you are seeding this tournament. It doesn't seem fair that you are punishing some players for not having reached the top 16 yet - presumably, they deserved to be there all along, moreso than people who were eventually pushed out due to the newcomer's ascent. A good example of this is Terenceshiu2005 - he was not ranked in the top 16 until September, and since has climbed to the top 5 players in the world. Yet, you have him seeded at only 12th. I get that this ranking is the "most consistent" players in the top 16, but it seems unfair to knock players for merely not having reached their true ranking yet.

My solution to this would be to weight ranking values according to the currency of the rank - in other words, players should earn more points for a top 16 rank in October than a top 16 rank in August. Right now you are assigning a linear scale: 1st place gets 16, 2nd place gets 15, etc. Perhaps could keep the linear scale but change the coefficient from 1 to 1.25, and then to 1.5, changing by Month? Something like that. If you wanted to be more precise, you should really change the coefficient weekly, but that's a bit more complex.

If you think this is a good idea and would like some help, I am happy to help. I have the data already after all.

Thanks for the offer. First I would like to say that this ranking was simply used for qualification, not actual seeding within the tournament. Your concern did occur to me. Yes, clearly newcomers who are very strong players may be ranked lower than they should if we're basing it on skill at this precise moment in time. For qualification, however, I did not deem this an issue for the following reason:

The purpose of this tournament is to have a competition between the most consistent players over the course of each season. In this case, Season 1. Players who have come late and managed to place highly are impressive. However, these strong new players ultimately did show up late to the season and will have their chance to place highly in due time when the Season 2 tournament comes around assuming they keep playing at a high level.

At any rate, as Eijolend stated, we don't want to retroactively change the qualification requirements. Again, players will have their chance in Season 2.

Now for seeding within the tournament, my thought was simply to look at the most recent ranking on 11/30 when the tournament participants are all confirmed so we can order players by their most recent league rank at the time of the tournament's start.* I'm open to you doing some kind of diminishing point system over the course of the whole season if you want for seeding within the tournament, but I'm not sure it's necessary. Is it much better than just taking the ranking at the time of the beginning of the tournament?

*Actually more specifically my tentative plan was to take the most recent rankings for the last two or three weeks at the time of the registration deadline and sum them up so it would be more reflective of present skill. Anyway, I'm open to you doing your scaled seeding system for the tournament once the participants are confirmed if Gfich is fine with it.

[garcia1000]

HEY GUYS.

I only saw this thread just now. I will put my name down for this tournament if it happens after the update!

[CombatEX]

The update has been submitted and should be live by the registration deadline. At any rate, we will certainly wait until after the update to start the tournament.

[GreatGonzales]

(11-15-2012 02:02 PM)CombatEX Wrote:  Thanks for the offer. First I would like to say that this ranking was simply used for qualification, not actual seeding within the tournament.

Oh I see. Then this isn't as big of an issue if you plan to seed the actual tournament by the most current ranking data. My only comment on that is that, in the (likely) event that some of these people who qualify do not have a rank listed in the most current top 200 list (due to inactivity), you should use the next most recent rank for them. This might be a good reason to take the last three rankings and take the average.

I am in agreement that nothing should be done for this season, since the announcement was sent out using this list. But I still think you should tweak your qualifying list for season 2 using some iteration of the method I described. The reason being - yes, this is only qualification, not seeding in the tournament - but different people would qualify, and in a different priority, if you weighted ranks on their currency. I still feel this would give you a more accurate representation of the most consistent players. If you think about it, a top 16 rank in October (as opposed to August, for example) is indicative of a more consistent player, because they have been able to reach/maintain their high rank despite ever-increasing difficulty to hold a top 16 spot.

In any case, though, I don't think anything should be done for this season. Just some things to keep in mind if you ever do this again.

[Gf!sh]

Well, basically for the seedings i was planning to add the last two weeklys of Season 1 together (Oct 19th and 26th). That would give us the following seedings:

1. ..Sir3..*
2. P1noyboypj*
3. Calmon!
4. Alvendor
5. Terenceshiu2005
6. Zero_Killer
7. el*tabasco
8. JavaSeed
9. 1010100011
10. awpertunity
11. poweewee*
12. blueswimmer95*
13. Harti!
14. Gavin Wins
15. garcia10000
16. cherylto
    

*In case of a tie, last weekly is decisive, this is why ..Sir3.. is seeded first

The main reason why didn't use the most recent weeklys is that, well, this is a Season 1 tournament, and it feels wrong to include Season 2 weeklys in it.

[GreatGonzales]

(11-16-2012 01:35 AM)Gfich Wrote:  Well, basically for the seedings i was planning to add the last two weeklys of Season 1 together (Oct 19th and 26th).

That seems fine to me. Anyway, it's y'all's tournament, just giving my two cents!

---

(11-16-2012 12:53 AM)GreatGonzales Wrote:  If you think about it, a top 16 rank in October (as opposed to August, for example) is indicative of a more consistent player, because they have been able to reach/maintain their high rank despite ever-increasing difficulty to hold a top 16 spot.

I'm now second-guessing myself. My statement quoted above is not necessarily true in all circumstances. I think right now it is true that the competition is still trending up for a spot in the top 16 overall players, but it may be the case that this pressure begins to decline at some point in the future as interest in Outwitters wanes and top players stop playing. So, we would need to make a best guess on this.

[aaronINdayton]

Looks like I got put on the latest top 200 list, I'll be a reserve if you need to fill slots.

[Yz Easy]

Hello players! I am highly interested in participating. Current ranking is 26 i believe. In case case any of the top 16 flops, please keep me in mind.

Thank you

YZ

[CombatEX]

(11-16-2012 01:35 AM)Gfich Wrote:  Well, basically for the seedings i was planning to add the last two weeklys of Season 1 together (Oct 19th and 26th). That would give us the following seedings:

1. ..Sir3..*
2. P1noyboypj*
3. Calmon!
4. Alvendor
5. Terenceshiu2005
6. Zero_Killer
7. el*tabasco
8. JavaSeed
9. 1010100011
10. awpertunity
11. poweewee*
12. blueswimmer95*
13. Harti!
14. Gavin Wins
15. garcia10000
16. cherylto
    

*In case of a tie, last weekly is decisive, this is why ..Sir3.. is seeded first

The main reason why didn't use the most recent weeklys is that, well, this is a Season 1 tournament, and it feels wrong to include Season 2 weeklys in it.

Makes sense. That was my secondary plan, but I actually prefer it after reconsideration. Well, except for the fact that the final seeding will be over the players who end up qualifying so some of these players may not actually qualify and hence wouldn't be seeded in the first place (but I think you just made this as an example). Anyway, I did tiebreakers the same way in my qualification list (looked at most recent rankings to determine precedence). It's good that we're consistent.