Curiosity question: How can two players have the same ranking? Never noticed it before. In this game both Vlad and Max are ranked 32… hand #292025434
Well, ranking by lack of chips will not work I think…Perhaps we should all vote on who are the best players or nominate a blue ribbon panel to rank players…i
Joe - I gave a little thought to this and it may have something to do with the fact that you are playing against people who are good enough to fold. In many games at lower stakes, people will call 3 streets of bets on a K-high so a lot more hands will go to showdown. Therefore, even this statistic may not say as much about the style of play as I originally thought. It may in fact say more about the types of opponents you are facing.
Curious to see what you think of this speculation since you are the one actually playing against higher ranked players. Would it be fair to say that the better players will release hands more frequently and limit losses rather than chase? I’d be curious to see the percentage of pots overall that go to showdown broken down by stakes. I’d bet that there is a strong relationship of %pots taken without showdown to increased stakes.
We should do away with chip count altogether as it has nothing to do with how good a player you are
Replay poker should also drop the tournament points and should run a monthly scoring system regardless of the prizes and buy in fee .This system should only apply to sit and go and multi table tournaments
In both cases you get one point for every player you beat whether it is a 100 person multi table tournament or a heads up
That means that everyone gets 1 point for every person you beat regardless of the tournament
The more games you play the more points you get
It will also help to stop some of the bingo players or the multi chip millionaires
When you get busted out of a game and you beat 30 players you get 30 points
You start a new points table every month which is updated every day and we can all see how we rate
At the end of the month the 20 top players are invited to play in a monthly game and this will give us the monthly top player and that is how he is rated ( maybe there could be multiple prizes put up be Replay )
At the moment we have tables of players that have played thousand of hand over who knows how many years and have 100dreds of millions of chips and have very little meaning
The scoring system will encourage people to play more tournaments especially if they are near the top 20 , this will mean more entry fees for replay and from this they can set the monthly prizes
This will also bring more new players in th Replay Poker as the monthly prizes will be pretty exiting
Would like to hear comments from other players
Well, you can have my chips when you pry them from my cold dead fingers…
Besides, your system fails to take into account good runs and bad runs of cards with that restart every month…also fails to incorporate bankroll management…also some other stuff that I am not willing to take the time to type out…
i have also gave it a try, hope it helps
another player ranking calculation
Awesome post there Yiazmat…
Now that this post has leggs, so to speak… let me update you all on this topic.
After realizing that any arbitrary formula will never satisfy everyone, I say then another approach is needed… Either you go to a page and ask for newest rankings, using certain “checkboxed” variables/stats… or you used the “settings” page and checkoff what your criteria is for “displayed” rankings… by that I mean the rollover of a person, while you’re on a table ( like fig. 1 )
Let me explain both Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 …
Figure 1 - is the hypothetical rollover, while seated on a table.
Figure 2 - is a hypothetical Rankings Page, or a template for a settings page for rankings.
In Fig 1, you can see some additions…
Expanded Rank - This assumes that there are fixed formulas for each catagory… ( ie- MTT, SnG, Overall, ect )
Leaderboards - These symbols represent different leaderboards and would contain rollovers to display specific details. ( ie- on rollover it would say… Monthly Low : xxx place, ect ect … and possibly 4 symbols, like for 1st, 2nd, 3rd, all others, contained within a specific symbol for like Monthly Low/Med/High, and slight difference for SnG, MTT, ect ect… so a few of them you could recognize easily by sight. ( Samples on pic are just samples not final symbol )
Figure 2 is a sample Page, or settings Page …
Replay Poker knows what the database would easily support mining ( the checkboxes ) and in that way any player could ask to see the rankings in any way they want. This is a win-win for mgmt too… instead of spending time making formulas that some people will always complain about, they let the players decide what criteria to use… and all they have to do is make 1 page for all the checkboxes, then 1 generic formula to utilize the criteria from the checkboxes. ( less complaints, easier programming (maybe) ). Either a Page for instant rankings using criteria, or a settings page so that on that rollover it will display the usefull rankings in a few catagories ( set up by the player themselves )
This helps players too because they can analize things to the N-th degree anyway thier heart desires. Helping them pinpoint places they are either super good at, or very bad at… lol… And seriously, how can I complain about the rankings when its my own criteria… I cannot…
So I really do support both changes, and even if ReplayPoker makes the formulas for all but 1 line on that new rollover ( lets say “Custom” ) and allows from a settings page to feed data to that 1 line “Custom”…( to cut down on endless ranking querys ((bandwidth)) ) then I think that the playerbase would be much happier with “ranks/rankings”
( Yes, there are endless different critera Replay could offer us, what I listed was just a sample page ) (in a perfect world players would set up critera for all lines included in Fig 1 , except “RPR - ReplayPokerRank”)
thx a lot. you too.
i hope you and/or replay can use it.
also nice ideas in the update.
i like the idea of these samples of what it would look like.
i like the idea to let everyone have a say in it like some kind of poll.
but the downside would be that the very most people won’t have big knowledge of math formula’s and would probably look at a too way easy at it, and missing important stuff with it without even noticing.
also there may be missing important stuff that way because it might look like unimportant while in fact it is.
as you mentioned in the topic, you also would like to hear criteria and opinions. so i also have a few questions about your original formula:
1: what’s the theory behind the aggression factor?
i agree that aggression is a part of good poker, but it’s also (if not most) an even more important factor of one specific bad play, maniacs. often the worst players like to raise and shove without reason, what many people call “bingo players”. if this is got used, this would reward the biggest maniacs, while in fact it should reward the good players.
perhaps i am the one missing something, but in first sight it seems like it would reward the bad players more then the good
2: the value difference of the points
why is the value of chips so much higher then the other things?
lets assume we have a insane player that manages to win everything he plays so he has 100% cash,100% win and 100% profit. and according to your formula the amount of the percent will be multiplied as a total of points. x200 for wins, and x40 for the other 2. so we have (( (200100) + (40100*2) )) which is 28000 points for a perfect player. as with the earned chips someone with 28M chips would already have the same amount as all those 3 things counted together, so lets say 9,33M equals the average maximum of those points, and there are even players with billions of chips, 2outs4u even has about 10B. assuming his chips are all earned he would have already 10000000 points only from chips. so taking the 2 extremes means that most of all other things only matters 0,28% and chips matter 99,72%, however a few points aren’t taken into this yet so the final calculation is a bit less different then point out here, but it’s to get the idea.
don’t know if i am the one misunderstanding it, but at least i wanted to let you know.
if i do understand right, i hope this helps.
at last wanna say that i really like your idea’s. gl with the formula’s and i’ll hope it wil be added.
i agree with most of your points but i believe you misunderstand the point of these ranking formula’s that sarah and i have made.
they aren’t meant to show we are better then the higher people or to punish the people who buy chips.
they are meant for a greatly different reason, to get closer to the true skill level of someone.
the chip ranking we have now does give some skill level since the more chips you have the more winnings, but at the same time it also has a lot of flaws in it, because of that we wanted to makle a formula that lowers the current flaws in it and at the same time increase the points that does matter skill based.
don’t get me wrong, i am already happy we do have a ranking at all, but since it won’t hurt to give idea’s, we have made idea’s to get a even better ranking.
hope this helps.
Well as I originally said, I wasn’t trying to reinvent the wheel too much… personally I would use many more variables. I think opening the topic up, was more important that if my formula would be used, because I never figured that.
As far as the agression thingy, it won’t favor the bingo players as stated in a replay somewhere… cause your hand win/played % will tank. and I think there needs to be a edit in 5… (hands won/hands played)(hands won/flops seen) and remember a % between 1-100… so you see a bingo player would go up on #6 but down on #5, only a good player would be up on both…
In order not to piss almost everyone #4 is there to give credit for all player’s hard work in earning and accumulating chips. That way within the strata that is the basic list, the other factors differenciate players.
We aren’t obsessed with rankings, just only based on bankroll is worthless.
i just thought of another thing:
another good formula besides your and my idea may be GPI. since this is a already proven succesful formula.
Warlock, bring it over here please…
You got me - thanks for pulling it over here. Didn’t know which thread to use anymore.
Warlock and others, above is a " example " of a settings page directly related to a "Custon Rank : " line in the player popup we all see about others. I do NOT think those are the best/only criteria that can/should be used… it was an Example… I think we the playerbase should all let replay know what we feel would be be helpfull, or if the database only can support certain criteria to be used, then use as much as the database allows kinda.
I see no prob with see’n a --Rank-- for Bankroll, Custom, Overall, Ring, SnG, and MTT.
I said originally, that my formula wasn’t some over analyzed, google-esque, quazi bloated… well u get the picture, it was something simple…Yiaz, took a stab too, but I wish his thread was all in here… Yes Warlock, I do think that the formula should be more detailed, then all the arguments start on what we think it should be, what replay thinks it should be, what Warlock or Sarah think it should be… and the more I liked the Idea of a custom Rank , player centric for formula/critera…
You see if I let you check off “3 bets”, you still don’t know how I am calc’n them, all u know is they are now … relevant… Now if you only take things that the database already keeps track of, and offer those as critera… thats a start… I was also thinking of something that litterally wouldn’t take the staff I huge outlay of actuall coding time, most of the time spent is in the discussion in the 1st place…
I Hate that anyone can go see my last x # of hands in ring games, so for all you who say this idea can be used as data mining, well… yeah I guess ur right, but replay already shares vital info with everyone… So I really dont see that as a viable reason to opt out, not any reason to opt out… I can’t opt out from ppl see’n my last hands or my current bankroll, can I ?
If a Custom Rank could work… as with everything, Implementation is the key… and a very detailed , cleverly put together settings page just might fit the bill.
To Seville’s point, if you always win the hands u bet out on… your Agg factor would help, bingo players would always get kill’d in rank, and it wasn’t wieghted enuff for that alone to overshadow general good play/finishes… All I went for, was things I already thought the database kept track of, and basic things that should be in there… it was just a pre-beta-release-formula thingy-ma-doo-hicky.
Lets face it, Someone had to start the topic “New Ranking Calculation” because @least we all can agree, just on Bankroll … thats a rank Rank.
Its a great topic Sarah and I hope more people get involved with the discussion. I think your idea of the custom screening page has huge potential and could be run alongside a more traditional ranking system as well.
FYI - I wasn’t criticizing the level of detail in your formula or Yiazmat’s. I was just suggesting that the specific factors and weights could be determined by sifting through the data that exists already, once a consensus definition of “skill” was agreed to.
As to the opt-out feature, no you cant opt out of showing certain information now but if we are looking to make changes and improve the player satisfaction in other areas, why not allow for this in the future? You don’t like having hands available for others to see. I don’t like having bankroll displayed. Others may not want any part of their play available to be crunched through a program for other players to see. I cant see the harm in at least making the case for the opt-out while we are discussing this aspect of the site.
Warlock, I started on Full-Tilt mainly and some Pokerstars… Little did I know that a Poker magazine or something , somehow got info from all the pokersites, and right there… had me rank’d 6 ways to sunday… I feel that if someone wants to know how I play, then they need to pay up and play against me. Everything is a tradeoff tho for mgmt, but Warlock… being able to go watch me play a huge hand for free, is alot different than me saying… of the 900,000 ppl here, how do I stack up in 1 catagory against everyone… lets say just W-L %…
Its not telling you what my percentage is, its just saying how is it ranked vs the playerbase. So in a way, its not really revealing raw details, only specific generalities… I also can’t remember any poker site not showing a players bankroll on thier profile page, even if it might have been hard to find.
I believe we are in, and have been in… totall agreement on this : [quote=“1Warlock, post:76, topic:5490”]
by sifting through the data that exists already, once a consensus definition of “skill” was agreed to.
[/quote]If Replay determines the criteria, I’m 99.9997% sure there will be no opt-out. Some type of system, can only increase revenue and traffic, if it is Implemented thoughtfully and completely… You wanna give people a reason to play more, or be better players… have a real ranking syatem.