PDA

View Full Version : Suggestions for 2008


Uranus
Nov 10th, 2007, 09:35 PM
Here's a thread for those who have suggestions for 2008.
I believe a few things can be done to make the game more attractive. Discuss! :)

Thought about a 17 best tournaments system or commitments, to avoid the fact that the ones in top 10 are actually those who never forget to play.

And give points like at PAW (ranking in a tournament => certain amount of pts). Would make things more interesting as well. i.e. it's catastrophic for your ranking atm if you forget to play a GS. You can drop from #15 to #30 and it's VERY difficult (nearly impossible, lol) to get back there.

Time to give ideas, guys ^^.

In The Zone
Nov 10th, 2007, 09:55 PM
I think the rankings should be changed to something similar to PAW. It would work PERFECTLY for this game.

~Eclipsed~
Nov 11th, 2007, 05:55 PM
Yeah i think PAW rankings would be the best idea.

I.E. I played most of the year this year and have had decent results at most tournaments, but it's not reflected in my ranking. I also forgot to play Wimbledon, but have consistently played smaller tournaments which feels like it does next to nothing for your ranking no matter how well you do.

Uranus
Nov 19th, 2007, 09:58 PM
So, I think it's a good idea to use a PAW-like point system.

17 best tournaments? It would be very interesting but nonsense if commitments are not included.

Commitments => 1 tournament/week? I don't know if there will be enough players for that.

Uranus
Nov 19th, 2007, 10:02 PM
And a few details:

- Edited picks: if they were edited before the tournament began, I think it should be okay.
- Forget about that Q/LL1, 2, 3... that was used sometime last year. Only Q1 def. Q2 or Q2 def. Q1 (following their placement in the draw), when they're facing each other.

Please give your opinion, FITD players! :)

In The Zone
Nov 19th, 2007, 10:06 PM
I like the commitment and PAW rankings idea. :yeah:

I still don't think editing picks is a good idea. People may change them based on what other people have done. Especially when it comes close to the YEC.

Uranus
Nov 20th, 2007, 05:33 PM
I still don't think editing picks is a good idea. People may change them based on what other people have done. Especially when it comes close to the YEC.
Oh, you're right, indeed. ^^

SvetaPleaseWin.
Dec 2nd, 2007, 09:21 PM
And a few details:

- Edited picks: if they were edited before the tournament began, I think it should be okay.
- Forget about that Q/LL1, 2, 3... that was used sometime last year. Only Q1 def. Q2 or Q2 def. Q1 (following their placement in the draw), when they're facing each other.

Please give your opinion, FITD players! :)

i think its easier just to say no edited picks-then people dont get confused

i agree with the qualifier thing though 1 def 2 simplifies it

the ranking thingy sounds good too :yeah:

In The Zone
Dec 4th, 2007, 12:44 AM
For the rankings, if we begin anew, it will put too much emphasis on the early tournaments.

So I suggest we calculate the rankings both ways. The "PAW-esque" rankings will be the Race while the normal rankings where we count ALL points will be for official records, such as who is # 1. And then at the close of 2008, we'll have our "PAW-esque" system in place.

Unless someone wants to research and revert the entire ranking system to PAW but that would take AGES.

Bennguin1491
Dec 4th, 2007, 04:20 PM
For the rankings, if we begin anew, it will put too much emphasis on the early tournaments.

So I suggest we calculate the rankings both ways. The "PAW-esque" rankings will be the Race while the normal rankings where we count ALL points will be for official records, such as who is # 1. And then at the close of 2008, we'll have our "PAW-esque" system in place.

Unless someone wants to research and revert the entire ranking system to PAW but that would take AGES.

I think this is going to be the easiest for all of us! :)

Uranus
Dec 5th, 2007, 05:14 PM
Unless someone wants to research and revert the entire ranking system to PAW but that would take AGES.
Well actually I was about to do it so... :angel:

~Eclipsed~
Dec 6th, 2007, 05:53 PM
Well actually I was about to do it so... :angel:

Wow:eek: Then go for it i guess.:)

I actually did the same thing for the game I ran although there wasn't nearly as many players.

Uranus
Dec 9th, 2007, 11:14 PM
Points distribution for 2008 attached. Tell me what you think of it so that I can update if needed. Thanks.

In The Zone
Dec 10th, 2007, 01:33 AM
I love it! :D A+, Great job Ben. ;)

This game will really become much more interesting this way.

~Eclipsed~
Dec 10th, 2007, 02:31 AM
Excellent!:cool:

Uranus
Dec 12th, 2007, 11:41 PM
I'm re-doing the ranks according to the PAW system. Big changes expected, lol. Slam & tournament winners in general are highly advantaged.
I only kept 1 tournament/week, the better score.

As we're probably going to include commitments:
- How long before the tournament begins? Late entries? etc.
- Entries:
GS: as many as possible.
Tier I, olympics: max. 64 (exceptions: Miami, IW?)
Tier II, III, IV: max. 48
...with an average of 60-70 players a week at the end of 2007. This to help the lower tiers get players.
- Exception: 1-tournament weeks. Everyone would be able to play (?).
- WCs available if a player forgets to commit (which will happen, esp. at the beginning of the year). Priority: lower tiers (?).
Haven't thought about this before, just say what you think is better.

In The Zone
Dec 12th, 2007, 11:44 PM
I am not quite sure. I figured because FITD is so wide open, etc. that commitments aren't necessary and that people can play both tournaments. I don't know.

I can see it being played both ways. I don't see FITD as the type of game that you need to limit yourself to only one tournament a week -- that's my opinion.

In The Zone
Dec 12th, 2007, 11:46 PM
I am not quite sure. I figured because FITD is so wide open, etc. that commitments aren't necessary and that people can play both tournaments. I don't know.

I can see it being played both ways. I don't see FITD as the type of game that you need to limit yourself to only one tournament a week -- that's my opinion.

Oh wow. I forgot we're doing the best of 17 system. So yeah, I am not sure commitments would work for this type of game but you should only be allowed to do one tournament a week. :)

Uranus
Dec 13th, 2007, 12:08 AM
You're probably right. :)
I'm not particularly in favour of this system either. Annoying for everyone. But as we had talked about this earlier...
Awwh, you're too good at convincing me, haha.

In The Zone
Dec 13th, 2007, 12:25 AM
;) I'm good at everything. WINK.

Uranus
Dec 13th, 2007, 12:27 AM
Shhht. Can't tell them about this! ;)

Harvs
Dec 13th, 2007, 02:44 AM
i like the way it was run this year:(

DPJ
Dec 17th, 2007, 10:02 PM
can i join anywhere???

In The Zone
Dec 17th, 2007, 10:39 PM
You don't have to join. Just play when the threads come out. :)

oooo86
Dec 19th, 2007, 09:45 AM
Here's a thread for those who have suggestions for 2008.
I believe a few things can be done to make the game more attractive. Discuss! :)

Thought about a 17 best tournaments system or commitments, to avoid the fact that the ones in top 10 are actually those who never forget to play.

And give points like at PAW (ranking in a tournament => certain amount of pts). Would make things more interesting as well. i.e. it's catastrophic for your ranking atm if you forget to play a GS. You can drop from #15 to #30 and it's VERY difficult (nearly impossible, lol) to get back there.

Time to give ideas, guys ^^.

1. i think you wrong and it should not be best 17 because those who don't forget to play deserve to be high ranked people because they are really intrested in the game and don't forget to play and they deserve credit for this....

2. i think you right by doing the paw system points........... but you can do it a little diffrent by not giving any points for those who finished in the last places of tournaments...... i explain: in a grand slam if 100 players are playing only the top 80 get points ( the top 80 will get points by the paw points system) and in that way players who forget to play a g.s. will not be effected as much as they are now....

i hope i helped a little...... good luck with the game.....

Uranus
Dec 27th, 2007, 10:42 AM
1. i think you wrong and it should not be best 17 because those who don't forget to play deserve to be high ranked people because they are really intrested in the game and don't forget to play and they deserve credit for this....

2. i think you right by doing the paw system points........... but you can do it a little diffrent by not giving any points for those who finished in the last places of tournaments...... i explain: in a grand slam if 100 players are playing only the top 80 get points ( the top 80 will get points by the paw points system) and in that way players who forget to play a g.s. will not be effected as much as they are now....

i hope i helped a little...... good luck with the game.....
Yes but with the system we used in 2007, only the players who played the most were rewarded. Performance also counts. The real tour is run that way. You know, Serena plays less than 10 tournaments a year and she's top 10. Sandra Zahlavova, for example, plays around 40 and she struggles to stay in top 150.

Oh and as for the idea of not giving points, the last places get you only 2 or 5 pts, it won't change anything. ;)

Uranium
Dec 28th, 2007, 02:48 PM
i like the idea where you play all the tournaments that week, but only your best result counts for that week.
but that's just me.

Uranus
Dec 28th, 2007, 06:00 PM
Okay, so, this is what will change for 2008 - not much.

Everything about the rankings - check the thread. ;)
And you're allowed to play all tournaments scheduled every week, but only the best result of the week will be counted.

So, no changes about the way you play the game, only the rankings. So that no one will get lost or what. I hope it's okay like that.

Good luck to all the players this year!

Uranium
Dec 28th, 2007, 06:05 PM
Okay, so, this is what will change for 2008 - not much.

Everything about the rankings - check the thread. ;)
And you're allowed to play all tournaments scheduled every week, but only the best result of the week will be counted.

So, no changes about the way you play the game, only the rankings. So that no one will get lost or what. I hope it's okay like that.

Good luck to all the players this year!

:bounce:
you did my idea:D