Snorri
Joined: Jun 07, 2004
|
 Posted:
Aug 19, 2006 - 06:07 |
 
|
Why is it Fumbbl Tournaments are only open to ranked? |
|
|
momfreeek
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Aug 19, 2006 - 06:12 |
|
|
Snorri
Joined: Jun 07, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 19, 2006 - 06:37 |
|
Real Deal! 
Seems like a blurry grey area to me.
Just a quick inspection of any of the big Fumbbl tournaments shows how loaded they are with coddled (and to a lesser extent) cherrypicking teams. Doesn't matter whether its ranked or unranked, people will find ways to coddle their team for a big tournament. I got somewhat buried in the warpstone because I couldn't get motivated to deal with playing ranked games between the qualifier and final. Came back to find everyone had jumped some 50TR thanks to 'soft' games with their mates. And thats not including all the soft games they clock up before they enter.
Just seems a shame to have many of the best coaches and teams not playing in the big tournaments. Our Fringe group has some damn good teams and coaches that dont play ranked, yet build their teams in an environment where far less coddling and cherrypicking goes on.
Maybe there's a better way to screen teams for fumbbl tourneys than the simple [R] and [U] classification? |
|
|
Snorri
Joined: Jun 07, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 19, 2006 - 06:43 |
|
On the same topic, it would be good to see a Fumbbl tourney with something like a starting TR200 cap. BBowl seems best targeted for the 150-200TR level and a starting TR200 cap tourney would be a much better test of coach skill than the current tournies which all primarily seem to test team building (coddling) skills.
I imagine there'd still be some meticulous team building to get the 'perfect' TR200 team, but I'm sure it would provide for somewhat different, and for me, much more interesting tournaments. |
|
|
momfreeek
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Aug 19, 2006 - 06:49 |
|
| Snorri wrote: | | Came back to find everyone had jumped some 50TR thanks to 'soft' games with their mates. And thats not including all the soft games they clock up before they enter. |
Hmm. not allowing friendly games inbetween rounds might be a good idea. Pro and Elite smacks are good fun. I don't see how doing it in unranked would help matters anyway. Hey, why not make your own unranked tournament? Screen teams how you like. If it works well maybe some of your ideas will be adopted. |
|
|
Malthor
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Aug 19, 2006 - 06:53 |
|
Snorri...
First of all what are you talking about? It was not possible to play games between the qualifier and the final. Your opponent in the GLT could not have gotten soft games with their mates before their final with you.
Secondly, Ranked is the Real Deal in that it is the premier division of FUMBBL. Just check the stats for number of games played.
Cherrypicking and coddling is part of the open ranked structure.
I have some things planned for next year that will make the ranked tournaments even more meaningful to more coaches. Some of the other things that have been discussed include no qualifiers for FUMBBL Cup next year. IE, straight 256 team KO. No recovery/cashup/soft games between qualification and the final.
Unranked tournaments are too open to different types of abuse and variation LRB rules. EG 1v1, 4v4, no apoth leagues, no RR leagues, no big guy leagues etc.
So the SWL is well respected. If we add that to the list of official FUMBBL tournaments, the NWL will want in. Then another, and another and another. Who is responsible for assessing the worth/merit of each league?
Your SWL seems to be running strong so what is the issue?
As for coddled etc teams, look at past major winners, eg Charade, Nandorins, Black Axe. Coddled? Don't think so  |
_________________
ex Monkey (original Team Approvers in 2004)
ex Admin
ex Ranked Tournament Manager
still disliked all round! |
|
OldBugman
Joined: May 05, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 19, 2006 - 07:36 |
|
| Malthor wrote: |
First of all what are you talking about? It was not possible to play games between the qualifier and the final. Your opponent in the GLT could not have gotten soft games with their mates before their final with you.
|
Reference was made to the Warpstone cup, but anyway. Everyone plays games between the qualifiers and the finals.
PS, you yourself played 2 games. |
|
|
Snorri
Joined: Jun 07, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 19, 2006 - 07:43 |
|
Ok, didn't want to really get into any sort of tussle here, was just suggesting some ideas.
| Malthor wrote: | Snorri...
First of all what are you talking about? It was not possible to play games between the qualifier and the final. Your opponent in the GLT could not have gotten soft games with their mates before their final with you.
|
I wasn't talking about the GLT. I was talking about the Warpstone.
| Malthor wrote: |
Secondly, Ranked is the Real Deal in that it is the premier division of FUMBBL. Just check the stats for number of games played.
|
We've had this discussion before. Yes, your statistics hold true. But there are people that exist outside that loop, and will continue to do so in the present environment. Using statistics as justification for a blanket conformity is as bad as a government completely ignoring minority groups because they are, minority groups.
| Malthor wrote: |
Cherrypicking and coddling is part of the open ranked structure.
|
I really hope people dont quote you on that. It is a fact, but I'm sure its one of the negative aspects of ranked you want to discourage.
| Malthor wrote: |
As for coddled etc teams, look at past major winners, eg Charade, Nandorins, Black Axe. Coddled? Don't think so |
I wasn't talking only about winners. I was talking about a large proportion of the teams.
| Malthor wrote: |
I have some things planned for next year that will make the ranked tournaments even more meaningful to more coaches. Some of the other things that have been discussed include no qualifiers for FUMBBL Cup next year. IE, straight 256 team KO. No recovery/cashup/soft games between qualification and the final.
Unranked tournaments are too open to different types of abuse and variation LRB rules. EG 1v1, 4v4, no apoth leagues, no RR leagues, no big guy leagues etc.
So the SWL is well respected. If we add that to the list of official FUMBBL tournaments, the NWL will want in. Then another, and another and another. Who is responsible for assessing the worth/merit of each league?
Your SWL seems to be running strong so what is the issue?
|
I wasn't asking about letting the SWL into the competition.
All I wanted to discuss really, was finding some other way of screening teams so that legitamitely built teams could play in Fumbbl tournaments. Until they do, they are not truly a representative of the best on Fumbbl and the title of a Fumbbl tournament wont ever mean much at all, to me at least. |
|
|
RandomOracle
Joined: Jan 11, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 19, 2006 - 07:47 |
|
(U) is the tournament division. You'd think that people playing there couldn't complain about adding some tournaments for the people in (R), but you'd be wrong. |
|
|
Snorri
Joined: Jun 07, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 19, 2006 - 08:08 |
|
Far out, not complaining Jan! I think its great that fumbbl has something like the official fumbbl tournaments and I dont really begrudge R teams being in them.
| Quote: |
All I wanted to discuss really, was finding some other way of screening teams so that legitamitely built teams could play in Fumbbl tournaments. Until they do, they are not truly a representative of the best on Fumbbl and the title of a Fumbbl tournament wont ever mean much at all, to me at least.
|
That was my point!
Anyway, you make it sound like people in [R] are exclusively separate from [U]. You are not excluded from tourneys in [U]. The logic of it all is a bit ironic.
You have an [R] team.
If you want to play tourneys, you transfer it to [U] for tourney play.
BUT...
You then can't play tourneys (ie the fumbbl ones).
Starting to think the whole fumbbl setup is a little crazy. |
|
|
RandomOracle
Joined: Jan 11, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 19, 2006 - 08:24 |
|
| Snorri wrote: |
You have an [R] team.
If you want to play tourneys, you transfer it to [U] for tourney play.
BUT...
You then can't play tourneys (ie the fumbbl ones).
Starting to think the whole fumbbl setup is a little crazy. |
More likely, if you want to play tournies, you create a team in (U) in the first place. If you like the open format and/or coach ranking you create a team in (R). Ranked tournies are an added bonus, as is transferring teams to (U). |
|
|
tautology
Joined: Jan 30, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 19, 2006 - 08:32 |
|
I really fail to see the issue here....
I find that (U)nranked is a great place for league play and for tourney play.
Ranked is where most games are played, and overall represents the most competitive environment in which to play (because thats where the most games are played).
Of course cherry-picking is possible in any open league, that will always be true. Ranked also represents thegreatest opportunity for cherry-picking, because that's where the most games are played.
To hold a tourney in Ranked allows many thousands of coaches and teams the opportunity to compete, and they are quite challenging in my experience.
If you want to hold unranked tourney's, go for it! If you think the ranked tourney's are dominated by cherry pickers (they aren't) then go out there and give them the beat down!
You want a way to screen teams? Tourney's are self screening...its called e-l-i-m-i-n-a-t-i-o-n 
You want a tourney in unranked? Build one!
You want to play in ranked? Play, its an open league. |
|
|
Mully
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Aug 19, 2006 - 10:07 |
|
| momfreeek wrote: | | Ranked is the real deal! Only LRB4 teams. No playing the same opponent over and over. Unranked is less strict, more abusable and has plenty of its own tournaments anyway. Faction is its own tournament system. Stunty.. lol. |
The idea that Ranked is NOT abusable is quite funny. In fact, I'd say there is more abuse (ie cherry picking) in ranked than unranked.
Most unranked teams are in leagues/tourneys where they have little choice on what team/race they will play against. Compared to ranked where many coaches don't even put their teams on gamefinder but instead watch like vultures for noobie prey to appear. |
_________________
Owner of the REAL Larson
Come join the CCC League |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 19, 2006 - 11:50 |
|
I'd like to see an official [R]anked tourney with starting TR AND TS cap of 200.
I think that this would favour 'in game' coaching skills rather than 'team building' skills.
I think that this would allow more (mostly) [U]nranked coaches to take part.
Currently many coaches do not have the time or inclination to create the kind of super team that could do well in a unlimited tournament.
TR/TS 200 gives more coaches a shot. There is less need to 'look after' your team. Less need to keep relentlessly building. No need to play a lot of [R]anked. 256 places would not be enough.
No qualifiers also helps some coaches. Being in the right place at the right time can be a problem. Playing two games back to back is also a problem for some. Drawing a coach on the other side of the could be a problem though. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
vanGorn
Joined: Feb 24, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 19, 2006 - 11:57 |
|
Well observed, Mully.
The ranked division is the place where incredible power teams can be created. And they were created in dozens. In unranked it may be faster by slaying defenseless pawn-teams again and again. But a team boosted in 200 ranked cherrypicker matches, or a similar team boosted in 20 unranked pawnsmasher matches, both of them would stumble when facing an tournament opponent.
I'm sure the cherrypicker will do quite better than the pawnsmasher because he got more experience by playing more matches. |
_________________
Gimme a pint of fungus beer!
Then we will climb the ladder.
 |
|
|
|
Gnome Roster - how a...
Search
