It shouldn’t go strictly by how much play money one has. Heck, one can “buy” their rating. If there is no formula or algorithm, per say, to determine one’s technical strength as a poker player (as is the case with chess ratings) albeit tournaments won, hand-by-hand performance, etc, then I think it should simply go by how much play money one has won since they’ve been on the site. Subtract all buy-in amounts including the 10,000 which I believe is given initially.
There’s someone on this site who I know who is ranked inside the top-500 and has never paid to get back in since he first hopped on this site. Just the 10,000 that was given to him initially and he simply never lost it, just built off of it to where he is now. Sure enough there are hundreds whom he’d be ahead of if everyone’s re-buy amounts would be subtracted. Anyone here who tries to make it to #1 just for fun, competitive reasons - it’d be nice if he or she can truly feel the feat was EARNED and not BOUGHT.
Now that’s not to say that anyone who is #1 or close to it has “bought” his or her way. Perhaps all chips were truly earned in these cases as well. just think that the 10,000 initially given and any re-buy amounts should be subtracted from the total amount of chips accumulated in determining these rankings. It would be fair and accurate.
Just a friendly suggestion. Thanks!