About the +1700 trial.

TugaChampion · Joined: 26 Jan 2006 Posts: 349

It's unfair that those above 1700 get an extra chance to get an invitational. So there should be a trial only for -1700 players. Also there are many more player under 1700 than above it so in a trial with 26 players it only gets 5 rounds at most and it depends much more on luck. Those trials are impossible to be played my most players. If by losing matches u didn't lose rating those trials would be fair but not like this coz when someone gets 1 point someone else gets -1. That's why there won't be many players that can join those trials.

Strovil · Joined: 11 Mar 2005 Posts: 567

There is already a thread for this.

TugaChampion · Joined: 26 Jan 2006 Posts: 349

where? I didn't see any.

Wurly · Joined: 14 Mar 2006 Posts: 37

drogba, are you implying that higher rating should come with no benefits?

TugaChampion · Joined: 26 Jan 2006 Posts: 349

I'm saying that if there is a trial for +1700 there should be another one for -1700. These trials are qualifiers not the real tourney. The best player will win that tourney but we shouldn't already only allow the best players to go there. They already have more chances than the other players it's not necessary to give them even more chances while screwing the rest of the players which btw are 90% of the players. Wizards didn't create an elitist game. Thet created a game for a large number of players. If they had created an elitist game they wouldn't have had so much success and that's why it's a fun game: everyone can play it.

GRAH · Joined: 31 Aug 2004 Posts: 599

Why would we want to make a trial that rewards people for playing badly?

Strovil · Joined: 11 Mar 2005 Posts: 567

You already reward people for having a crappy computer and/or no computer skills.

And it would not be a reward. You are not giving them anything extra, you are giving everyone essentially equal treatment. You allow the 1700+ players to play amongst themselves (thus finding "worthy" opponents) while the 1699- players get to play amongst themselves (thus finding "equal" opponents).

As for a lower than 1700 rating equalling bad players, you are sorely mistaken. The best player in the world has less than 1700 until he plays in enough tournaments. Some no doubt find that the trials and masters compete with other obligations.

Strovil · Joined: 11 Mar 2005 Posts: 567

And the other thread is here.

TugaChampion · Joined: 26 Jan 2006 Posts: 349

What's the problem of giving everyone equal chances? What does a dumb number tells about your skill? I've been very unlucky in important matches and also lost some rating because of the downtime. In the beginning I went down to 1500 because I kept using decks made by myself that were viable. I was just trying a few things and lost so much rating. Also rating doesn't reset at the end of the season so the long time players have a huge advantage.

Once again: those players already have higher chances why give them even more chances? is that fair?

fugii · Joined: 18 Aug 2005 Posts: 12

reward ppl for playing bad is really stupid.. cry more plz...

TugaChampion · Joined: 26 Jan 2006 Posts: 349

rewarding the "best" players is just as stupid coz that dumb number means nothing. I've beaten people with more rating than me and lost to other people with less rating than me. You think you are the best just coz u have more than 1700 in that meaningless number?

fugii · Joined: 18 Aug 2005 Posts: 12

you dont know how the rating works do you?

TugaChampion · Joined: 26 Jan 2006 Posts: 349

I know how they work probably better than you.

MeddlingMatt · Joined: 09 Mar 2006 Posts: 71

Some thoughts...

Rankings are only a reflection of how well someone performs. By giving people with higher rankings more chances in the trials, it distorts their play level unfairly. If you win a trial, your rating reflects that. But that doesn't mean you get an advantage for the next tournament, the rating system doesn't work like that.
The rankings are not designed to work in a vacuum. If you get to 1720 and each time you win 3 games you lose one and you can't get past that ranking, it's not a flaw that you lose so many more points when you lose. It's not just a measure of if you can beat the field, but by how much.
Therefor, removing the lower players and only playing among other 1700+ playeres, you are simply gaming the system.
If some people want to play only when they have to and only against high rated opponents to maintain an especially high rating, thats fine. But our community should not make poilicy of gaming the system to help them do that.
And finally, just remember that your rating ranks what you have done, the goal remains winning tournaments. You can't say it's unfair for someone with a high ranking to play someone with a low, it's just the nature of the beast. And by using the rankings as a form of persecution only games the system against those who have not had as much past success.

snoopster · Joined: 04 Dec 2004 Posts: 692 Location: nj

people with higher ratings should get benefits, and I think a 1700+ trial is good cuz it's good testing. and there should definitely not be a -1700 trial; that would be completely unfair to the good people.

you say that people have low ratings b/c they don't play enough? well, it is extremely easy to get one's rating over 1700, and it can be done by playing about 10 matches. so unless you are extremely new to m-l, it should not be a problem.