A New Humper/Rank player Uncovered

[unbiasbob]

ok well sammy has played 6 tough games in a row. This has brought the average rank of his opponents up to 1319(actually 1386 after removing players with ranks of 0 and doing so with my avg as well bringing it to 1306). So clearly it can be seen that cherry picking is going on. I love how Ruben implies that I am the great violator. lol. Yes it goes on all around us and it doesn't matter because it is well within the system. Now let's take a high rank guy. How about TOMBA. Let me give you his average opponent ranking. I hope everyone is sitting down. btw he is a 1623 rank and needs 1 or 2 adq games to make it back to the 2013 rank page. drumroll please..................................


1334 ----- yes this is the average rank of Tomba's opponents. imagine that? This makes guys like me and sammy look like nothing. Now Tomba has worked it out so his Kleier rank is ultra high. He is a true master of the system. these figures are exact btw

unbias-1306 - avg opponent rank vs my actual rank -152
samuel-1386 avg opp rank vs sammy's -141
Tomba-1334 -avg opp rank vs tomba -289
ruben 1455 avg opp rank vs ruben -145
AceRimmer 1509 - last year was 1445 so ace has upped the ante -230
Zach 1533 -155

so we can note here that myself, sammy, ruben and zach are all in the same ball park in terms of the average rank number of who we play vs our actual rank. players have different abilities. I am the weakest player on the list above for example and sammy 2nd weakest. but ruben goes off about who plays who the bottom line is he's playing players with an avg rank halfway btw myself and sammy. I never proclaimed I was a better player that ruben of even sammy

*sammy had 5 games vs players with 0 ranking for 2013: voetal 2, akaboom, bajoshua, fred
** I had 2 games vs players with 0 ranking for 2013: hermes and napoleon
***Tomba had zero games vs players with zero rank for 2013

all averages based on 2013 rankings

fun stuff



So everyone can spew out BS but I shall spew FACTS. real exact statistics computed to the nearest 1/10th of a point. so let's stick with the facts my friends. The reason I checked out Tomba was because I saw him pounce on siyamak with lightening speed. I then looked at his roster of games and was mesmerized by the dearth of anyone over 1450 except 2 games with Bolivar and a game with mojo. So really focusing on sammy and me is wrong when you have Tomba really going wild with this working the system thing. Let's not get sidetracked here, let's discover the true system experts and manipulators - within the rules of course. Tomba will need some adequates to get back on the 2013 rank page. all players 1423 and up step up to the plate and defeat Tomba. I'm game


my final statement is that I wish people would realize that players have different abilities and opponents chosen by then and higher ranked players dont differ much in terms of how much weaker they may or may not be

[zach21]

bob i know you are on my side and i know my avg rank is 1550 area against... but ill tell u what dont include me here for the discrepency because everyone knows if i could play only 1650 players i would i just have a much smaller selection for people ranked as high due to my high rank

[unbiasbob]

Yes Zach you're absolutley correct, I should not have included you but your avg opponent ranking does indicate that you play mainly very high ranked players to come out at 1550

[ruben87]

[unbiasbob]

LOL, frustrating when I refuse to play you. This is amusing Ruben. You're never even on when I'm playing games. When you're on there are countless players around to play. When I'm on my pickins are slim which is why I play Jack Bauer, psychicwarrior, Patriot, man of War and others. By all means come on btw 9pm and 4am NY time and maybe we can get in a few games. I'm not going to change my schedule so you can get your jollies with this obsession you have wanting to play me so badly. I'm not going to alter mine for you as I frankly have no desire to play you due to your obsession. I'll tell you what; let's never play that way you don't have to think and post so much about it. I dont much want to play you anyhow as I like to play friends and friendly people who I can joke around with: zach, psychicwarrior, patriot, man of war, jackbauer are examples. I've decided as I'm writing this post that I have no desire to play you...ever. I'd rather play zach 100 times than play you once. so do you comprende now? never, no games btw me and you. If this causes you frustration then that's your problem. Sammy came off ignore earlier today, you shall take his place

Also Ruben you do a lot more posting than you do playing

[ruben87]

whatever you like bob. Just don't cry here.

[samuel]

I was talking about this with Blacksheep last night while we were playing barrage - a whole nother area to look at as you won't believe how many people refuse to play me at that. Why should it be acceptable to decline barrage games but not classic? "Oh its down to luck" I hear. "Oh no I dont play that, its very different" - um, no it isn't. The 8 pieces you have could be what you have left in any classic game. UL is very different, barrage is not.

But anyway I digress. I was chatting with Blacksheep and he made a good point that he doesn't always want to play the top players because it takes a lot of energy and focus to compete in these games - if you're tired and just want a bit of fun, you will more likely look for a lower ranked guy because of the intense concentration an Ace or a NoChance requires if you want to compete. I also mentioned that you know the games against these guys will probably be lengthy as well, or you'll lose within 5 minutes. Its rare to beat these guys in under 15 mins. So you might not always fancy a long drawn out game (though of course you can never tell, a lower ranked player could also end up being lengthy but its less likely) so these are other reasons why you might avoid them. I don't believe I cherry pick and I don't think Bobs stats show I do. What I find more interesting is that I have certain 'bogey' players - players I find hard to beat even though they have a lower ranking than me. Equally there are 2 or 3 higher ranked players I find I usually do beat so perhaps I'd be their bogey player. Maybe its something to do with style of play?

[blacksheep]

Samuel, that is a very interesting point you bring up (about the bogey players - you may have coined a new phrase here) - the same happens to me. There are 1 or 2 players who I think I should be able to beat easily, (who are quite a bit below me) and yet I keep (or seem to keep) losing against them. How does that happen? The same thing, (as you say) with higher ranked players. There are again one or 2 who I seem to have more success than I should have against them.
It might have something to do with styles of play - and again, like you, I may be some other player's 'bogey player'. It's just how the game goes I suppose. But when we play, it turns out as you would expect - you win most of them.
_________________
I'm not super, and I'm no hero

[samuel]

It certainly seems to happen in barrage anyway - I'll beat some low ranker 10 times in a row and gain hardly anything, but when he gets his 1 win, my points come tumbling down. So, for people like Dozer to only play the lower ranks, it should still be difficult to maintain a high ranking because you'll always drop the odd game here and there. Equally someone like Count Floyd who tries to almost exclusively play 1500+ players, doesn't reap too much reward because he doesn't win enough of them but when he does win he is rewarded, so he's quite high up the pack. If Klier works properly then it actually shouldn't matter what you do in terms of your overall rank score. However someone like Dozer has benefitted elsewhere, like when he won was it 56 straight games? Or peka with his 100% winning streak. But no one seems to look at those stats so....

[blacksheep]

Well, maybe not yet they haven't, but our resident stats man, unbiasbob might yet get his teeth into this this one. And even Dozer can make mistakes - he played me earlier today and although he is a good player, he lost on this occasion. It happens to all of us - you can play a lower ranked player and they win - that is the beauty of the game in one way - you can never be certain of the outcome... it wouldn't be half as much fun if we knew we were going to win every game.
_________________
I'm not super, and I'm no hero

[unbiasbob]

[unbiasbob]

[blacksheep]

Thanks for that Bob. I suspect that you are right about Dozer. There is one factor that he may have failed to take into account. That is out of the previous 15 games we have played on classic I have never beaten him. But this was when I first joined Gravon, and I was not nearly so experienced then. I have more experience now, and my improvement has possibly taken me to the point where he would now struggle to win against me easily, unlike before, despite the large rank difference between him and me.

Still, if Dozer likes to play 'certain' players, as you say, it is not a problem at all I think. He comes here to enjoy games, as we all do, and there's no real harm in it. As samuel said, players who go down this route probably risk more than players who play a variety of abilities as when they take a loss or two from a lower ranker (like me) they stand to lose more points.
As you, me and just about everyone else knows (including top rankers) there is always the possibility of losing to a much lower rank. If one is after maintaining a high (ish) rank, just playing much lower ranks is indeed risky (and perhaps because it is so risky they should be commended on trying to do it that way) instead of the easy way of playing higher ranks than themselves. There's a thought... perhaps we have been approaching this the wrong way all along.

There is another thing as well. I was always grateful for players like Dozer and other high rankers to play me, because although I always got a good mauling, I always learnt something and took lessons away from my disasters.

So, in fact, all the players who play the lowish ranks are helping them become better players. (Yourself included) If you look at things the right way, there is always some good in it.
_________________
I'm not super, and I'm no hero

[ruben87]

[samuel]

Interestingly I was giving BS a history lesson about Dozer yesterday in the chat box - he was indeed the reason the adq/non-adq system was introduced, mainly after Ace became vocal about it which I guess anyone would when you have some upstart unseating you at the top without ever beating somebody in the top 20 or even 30. I also remember as well as pretending not to be there, Dozer would sometimes set it up as a non-ranking game. Perhaps he was bored of waiting for an easy target and wanted to play but not badly enough to risk a ranking loss. I think occasionally he even opted for duell games instead of classic! Anyway yeah maybe he should be commended though, he had 2 enormous win streaks which even against low rankers is hard to do and high risk.