sure it does as long as arc is base of tournapoints then tournapoints is overrated.

hate to say it but POOL tournapoints system is perfect as they have an average entries of tournapoints each tournament.

these tourna points are overated

people say there better than me because they got more, when to be honest, it doesnt prove a thing about who is the best

thats what the overall rankings are for

the overall rankings dont help either to be honest, the 2 best players on the game aren't ranked 1 and 2. though seb is pretty good .

To be fair, the 2 best players aren't ranked 1 and 2 because they rarely play... their fault, not the ranking system's fault.

I know, I was just saying that you shouldn't base peoples ability on ranking any more than on tournapoints.

Nick while you are here.....

^

Don't agree with that.

Its pretty hard to win an arcade tournament as there can be 40-50 players in a tournament whilst only about 8 in an orig tourney.

It's not peoples fault that more people like arcade on this site than orig.

yeah but we want tournapoints EVEN like pool is at the moment, on here arcade is how you win tournapoints so rest types lose value whereas if it was evened out then people like buddytobud who only plays orig could have a chance at winning a medal.

So you dont agree. That is like saying, i dont agree that we should win more ranking points from Original.

The fact is, orig tournys are unpopular because there are so few players. Alot of these arcade players will see that there are more tourny points up for grabs, which will lead to bigger tournys and much more points available.

Right now its a little weird isnt it.....we can win more ranking points in ranked games, and in the tournys themselves, but the tournapoints are exactly the same :S

What sense does that make?

Exactly, right now it is unfair on people who just play original or regular. The main focus is on arcade, which, if you beg my pardon, is the game which involves the most luck and is more like pool than snooker. Again what sense does that make?

Make people try and win tournapoints, but focus it on the table which is least like snooker? :S

So i will push for this to be implemented

I can only speak for myself but i hate original and even if most players played original i would still stick to arcade and reg as i enjoy playing those, regardless of tournapoints.

I do see what you are saying, there are good orig players who will never get a chance to win a medal but thats why i think there should be 'special' tournaments brought in for each discipline, like one off tournaments per week. So there would be 52 winners medals per year for orig, 52 for arcade, 52 for power etc

Or even 1 per month so 12 through the year. TournaPoints just show who have a huge amount of time on their hands not a huge skill level but if there were a 'special' tournament per week, better players could have a chance of winning medals.

I'd like to hear some news on them SuperTournaments.

I can see arpeggi's point, original is snooker. (dimensions wise) and as such is percieved more difficult to play, if nothing is going to happen in the way of changes to make Original Tournaments more lucrative. Can the Original Marathon atleast make a return?!

i asked sam about that earlier today he said he will take a look

can i ask why do i lose more ranking points in tourneys than i do normal games

worth double

ah ok

Personally, I don't see any good reason to change it from the current system. The Tournapoints system is cumulative system based on the number of entrants to a tournie and not how hard/easy the game is. In this respect it is similar to the simple pre-existing tournament win count with the added refinement of scaling the reward based on how far you have progressed and number of people entering. Ranking on the other hand is a comparative system which is scaled according to game difficulty in order to mitigate the effect of abnormal results (such as flukes) causing dramatic rank changes and adverse skewing of the overall tables, and the only reason of adding an extra scaling is an attempt to enhance the 'prestige value' of tournament wins. In a nutshell, we are not comparing like with like here.

Also, due the the overwhelming popularity and number of tournaments of Arcade over Original, the disparity will always exist anyway so nothing will be achieved.

In fact, if there are say, twice the number of Arcade competitors , twice the number of tournapoints would at least make the gap less noticeable.

I do not wanna have to play fluke ball in order to have some kind of chance to win a medal. Right now its pretty dam unfair on Original players

not just orig players but regular as well, i think its a safe bet that power and carom just wont get the entries which is a shame.

and yeah i hate arcade but luckily for me i don't care about a medal so ill hardly be entering arcade tournaments.

Just on the point someone raised about winning a 40 man arcade tourney is harder than winning an 8 man orig tourney...

Ok that is probably true, but winning a 40 man arcade tourney would be a lot easier than winning a 40 man original tourney. Anyone can beat anyone in arcade, as all it takes is to break and pot and if you are on a colour then you should make a frame winning break. I don't see this happen too often in regular and certainly not in orig. Yes it can be done but only by a few players. This means the better players have a bigger advantage in orig than in arc, so winning a tourney becomes harder. So these should be worth more.

Personally I would say for an average player carom is probably the hardest tourney to win, as there is generally a higher percentage of good players in them than in other tournaments. Unlike snooker games where you can win without your opponent getting a shot, they will always have a chance to beat you in carom. So maybe that should be scaled up a bit