I alway say that my tournaments are the most player friendly and offer the best format and rules. Why because I have the players decide what they want to make them the best, so I will let the players decide once again how they would like the point system (for ranking players - Yearly) should be decided. To be a vaild poll I will need at least 40 vote for the winning pick, 12 - 20 vote isn't going to cut an issue that effects the players rankings. If the poll doesn't have that many vote I guess ranking isn't that important anyway. One last thing, the reason I want a point system in the TBT is because I am planning to award a end of the year "Cash Prize" to the top three players with the most points (best average). Also I thought it would be fun for the players to get bragging rights for a year...LOL, "WHO REALLY WAS THE BEST PLAYER THAT YEAR"? Please vote which way to perfer to be ranked.
Clarification Tex, There might be some confusion - Is option 1 meant to be the only system under which you would operate the scheme of adding fractions to the divisor when computing the average, in order to penalise missed events? (The alternative to this being to require a minimum of 4 or 6 events in order to qualify at all.)
Sorry Colin The poll questions are limited to the number of characters that can be posted. The poll questions are all based on my point system for ranking the players with a yearly average except #5 which would be just a straight accumulative system (which would have no minus penilties for not showing up to an event). Questions number #2 - #4 are to find out how many events a player should have to play in to qualify for the year end ranking and qualify for one of the "Cash Prizes" I am wanting to award the top three winners.
No problem Tex I'm unlikely to be attending many of the events, unless your empire expands to this side of the Atlantic , so my interest is largely academic. FWIW, I voted for a min of four events, but I'd have thought that specifying a minimum number of events and having a penalty for missing events are two different ways of achieving the same thing - preventing someone from being ahead at the end of the year simply by having done well in one or two events - and so it would be a case of one or the other, not both.
Work in progress My system is not perfect, I'll be the first to admit it, but it is a starting point. We will never get anywhere unless we take the first step and that is what I am trying to do. I thank you and all the others for you feedback, without it I wouldn't know what the players want. Players feedback is how I try and improve on formats, rules, and hopefylly ranking systems.
Tough Decision I was torn between playing only 1 event to qualify or the accumulative point total for 13 tourneys. I voted for the 1 event to qualify so everybody who played had a chance to be ranked. I guess that would be the same for the accumulative point total folks also. I'll be happy with either method. I plan on making at least six tourneys on the tour minimum but hope to actually make 8-10 depending on the schedule and any conflicts. Lets get going TX. I really appreciate your giving input to the players. Nicely Done
