So after having read the various VALID points that I wrote, which make pefectly good sense and are logical you think the system is fine the way it is. Solely because at one stage we were doing it too. Only if life was that easy..
It doesnt seem as if you put much thought into this theory of yours.
Perhaps due to your max rank being 892.7 you dont have to go through what high ranked players go through.
Taking your arguement into account it still wouldnt be beneficial to the low ranked players. They will/ are losing games on a continous basis by simply being outclassed/ played by higher ranks.
Therefore:
- They will never learn how to play = low morale
- low Morale = prone to waste time
- Waste time = cause mischief and nuisance
- Remain low ranked = problem to loyal players
It may sound extreme but ultimately makes sense. You would never see a high ranked player behave this why, Since they utilise there time on achieving a high rank. No disrespect to the genuine lower ranks.

As Sean_paul said earlier... Basically there should be no limits to who u can play. U shouldnt be able to restrict ur games so only certain players join.

I have maintained a pretty good rank for quite some time now and the only way to do that is to play all comers.

the ranking adjustments take care of the difference in ranks so its not a problem

one of the mods/admin said that if you want to pick the rank of an opponent you can by being the one who enters they room. thats what i do if i want to play another higher ranked plaer

nothing needs to be done because its all fine as it is.

Lol seems no one is paying attention to what i have written..

How am I supposed to pick a high ranked opponant when there are only a few of us around at any given time in comparison to lower ranked players...

Anyways I give up.. Thought someone would counter my numerous sensible points in a professional manner, though everytime i get a response it seems to ignore my valid points and take the easy way out by commenting on "its fine as it is"

Why progress... its fine the way it is... thats my new motto...

Edited at 12:09 Tue 29/01/08 (GMT)

No offence _wrx_ but my rank is 926 and have been virt for a long time now, i have been up to 950 and always found it easy to find fellow virtuosos to play. The thing is high ranked player play more so there are always plenty on. maybe once you get higher you will understand that its not as hard as you seem to think.

i dont see why i would be better making a game where only some ppl could join as i'd have to sit and wait, but the way it is now if i want to play a high ranked opponent i just join their game. thats faster.

spinner said about making it so we can see the rank of ppl in a room b4 joining. that wud be progress as it would save you having to check profiles.

putting limits on people is going backwards not forwards.

Edited at 12:58 Tue 29/01/08 (GMT)

No offence hurricane147 but my high rank has been 956.9, I am a VERY oldskool player, I even used to play poolsharks, I was a virtuoso for a long period on original snooker, played all the time with the best players lordanger, spursjay, kappo.Therefore i attain much more experience then you do. Is this relevant information... nope. So next time lets get straight to the point.

High ranked players = MINORITY
Low ranked players = Majority

This is self explanatory, if not read my previous posts. All this repitition hurts.
Secondly, since when did improvement suggestions become a backwards thing.. opposed to moving foward in the right direction..

Lastly, I hope this will teach people how to debate a question. 1st you READ the 2nd parties arguement, then you elaborate on your opinion and thoughts in reference/ accordance to that arguement. You counter the persons points. The way i have.
So please, prior to your reply i suggest you READ my previous posts inorder to counter them.

Further to your previous posts as i don't want to feel your wrath, how about lounges for higher ranked players whereas as you progress you are allowed into the adept lounge, then the professional lounge and lastly the virtuoso lounge. Thus any games within those 'lounges' can only be played by the people of that rank.


What it does is disjoin the site, not good for lower and middle ranked players but catering for the better ones. Utopia? Maybe, but realistic? I think not!!!!

Lots of good points made, and this just shows the same thing that has always been found with these debates since way back in the pool sharks days.

Some people seem to have trouble finding games (like _wrx_ here) and others have no trouble (like hurricane147)

The simple fact is that people who want to pick and choose who they play are in a minority (possibly a minority of a minority, if we are referring to higher ranked players only).

Restricting entry to a game for everyone just because that one person only wants to play a certain rank is clearly undesireable.

I see the common suggestion of having a room owners rank displayed so that those who want to be picky, can be, has already been mentioned, however there is another method that hasn't been mentioned on this thread yet; the ability to search for players based on rank, and invite them to play.

This way you create a private game, so no-one else can enter, and wait for a suitably ranked opponent to accept the invite.

Thus letting those who want to, create a game, which no-one enters except those they choose.

However, the problem there is that it promotes the decline of rank as a meaningful statistic, since it will have been falsely elevated for some due to the restriction on opponents.

One cure for that would be to introduce a secondary adjustment, similar to edge adjustment, where the amount of rank you gain is depleted based on the ratio of higher ranked opponents played.

Edited at 18:36 Tue 29/01/08 (GMT)

Something that I thought about while reading spinner's post. Would it be possible to install a drop down menu on the "play online game" screen that has the ranks on, so the player can click one of these and the rooms with that rank owner are displayed.
For example, say someone wants to play someone in the 600's. They click the drop down menu and a list comes up:
500's
600's
700's
800's
900's
The player would then click 600's and a list of all games where the owner is of a 600 rank is displayed. This doesn't restrict anybody from playing someone else, as this drop down menu would be available to everyone.
Your thoughts on this?

Edited at 18:52 Tue 29/01/08 (GMT)

Excellent idea!

Edit - there's a thread over on pool on this subject, i'll quote your idea over there too. I think it will be popular.

Edited at 18:56 Tue 29/01/08 (GMT)

At last some genuine forward thinking people. I’m pleased that you guys have taken the time out to comment understandably and in a detailed manner rather then giving a few sentences of wisdom expecting people to gain the full picture.

My whole purpose of pursuing this matter in depth was on the foundation of personal experience and the experience of funky peers. Also to show admiration to funkysnooker, I believe as a loyal player we should contribute to enhance the gaming experience in any way possible. So its not "wrath" as fastboysam mentions, its appreciation. Though I do like your idea regarding dedicated lounges. This is not likely to disjoin the site, as funky continues to grow day by day.

As to spinners comments, 1) I don’t find anything wrong with choosing who to play, for apparent/ plausible reasons… 2) As for finding & inviting players is a frail idea, high % of people who come on funky come to play, thus continuously be bombarded with pm’s, invitations and declines, partially disrupting there game. 3) Also its lonely enough waiting in public games, let alone private rooms... 4) The whole purpose of this idea is to stop ranks from declining.
Lastly I think Iamtheworst has mentioned a GREAT idea, finally someone I like!


Edited at 19:28 Tue 29/01/08 (GMT)

Edited at 19:29 Tue 29/01/08 (GMT)

Neither do i (apart from the obvious detrimental effect on the ranking ayatem, but thats inherent). As long as players who are happy to play everyone can do so with no restrictions.



Obviously invites will only go to those not in game, and a simple ignore option for those who don't want to be invited cures that (Nick went on to more detail when it was first discussed)



Then play everyone, you won't be lonely



I thought the purpose was to play players of a similar experience? Using it to deliberately and falsely increase rank would be abuse of the facility and unfair on the mojority of players who play normally.

You either DO find something wrong with choosing whom to play or you DON’T. Make your mind up spinner. As for the detrimental effects, at present it is already having an unconstructive effect on the ranks. We don’t/ cant notice this since there has not been a immense implementation of change. Bearing in mind we are still in the pilot phase of funkysnooker, slowly but surely continuing to build and improve around us. You also inconsiderately discount people who enjoy playing others that obtain a similar rank, whereas my ideas are to cater for all, low & high ranked.

Not much of a cure if there remain implications. You want us to put the invite option on ignore. Therefore ignoring genuine friends who have an interest in playing vs.



It doesn’t make any sense at all. It defeats the whole object of this thread and my argument if I was to play everyone….

Edited at 01:52 Wed 30/01/08 (GMT)

Abuse the facility, unfair, deliberately and falsely increase rank????
Lol what the hell are you on about… sounds as if I’m committing an offence.
Where in the rules books does it say you are not allowed to choose your opponents? Its not as if we study each individuals weak points and go for the kill. We simply choose ANYONE with a similar rank. Correct me if I’m wrong, it’s legitimate.

My mind has been very firmly made up for a long time.

I don't mind anyone choosing who they play, but i do mind people restricting others from playing anyone they want.

Very simple.



Maybe it's time fo you to make up your mind. You either want to pick and choose who you play, or you don't.



If they have chosen to ignore invites, they dont have an intrest in playing. No problem there. You must also remember invites are unobtrusive, it's not like they would interfere with a game lime PM's can.



Yes, at the moment you can choose who you play, but as it's not a core part of the game, very few people do.

If one of these systems were introduced, then things would change. For example, take an average win, assuming you play everyone who enters your room, at being 7 points, however, an average win if you never play anyone under 900 rank would be around the 10 mark.

That means after 10 wins, the person using the facility has won 30 points more than the player who hasn't.

Fair?

(and before anyone mentions it, the inverse is also true if you lose 10 games)

Makes a lot of sense what u say spinner. but to put over the experience of a higher ranked player, i find snooker very different to pool.

i never have any problems finding another virt to play on snooker. just name your game "900 or over" or something like that.

some ppl moan that lower players enter, but tbh, i find that happens very very rarely.

Then I think you should make an effort not to try and confuse readers, such as



It has the potential to depict an incorrect meaning across to readers.
Also can you bear in mind a large % of people use English as a 2nd language, therefore sentences as above will only contribute to greater puzzlement.



Unfortunately AGAIN you confuse us with this comment of yours. You must recognise that by choosing whom to play you have already involuntarily restricted others from playing you. Simple..

Unfortunately AGAIN you seem confused. Since where abouts do I state/ portray even the slightest hint that I am in doubt? My mind was made the very first time I had posted on this thread; perhaps you may like to refer to it.