Changing name from "League" to "Gamerman's World Rankings"?

  • '19 '13

    As we per defintion don’t meet the criteria of being called “League”, especially after the motion to make “playoff-games” count in two tournaments, I make the motion to adequately rename our competition to something that accurately describes it.

    Make a vote or make another suggestion.

    I will post explanations in the next post:

  • '19 '13

    From the 2015 League Discussion:

    I know I am late, but I need to voice my thoughts about this:

    I’m completely against counting the playoff games as league games as long as we call it a “league”.
    It violates the definitions of both playoff and league. The fact that a game counts as a game in two different tournaments, separated by two years doesn’t make any sense, at least from my viewpoint. With a deep understanding of both US and European versions of Playoffs/Leagues in addition to understanding of Tennis, Chess and Boxing, I just can’t see how counting for BOTH “last year’s playoff” AND next year’s league makes any sense. I’ll explain a tad below, before offering my “solution” by drawing parallels to other sports.

    In the US, sports play for a league/conference/division that ultimately ends, and THEN playoffs are kicked off as a separate season. No games count as “double”.

    In Europe (and the world) the league is a separate entity, with no subsequent playoff on a national level.
    And the “cups/national playoffs” are run at the same time as the league, as a separate tournament.
    There are also annual international tournaments on the European level running and ending at the same time as the league, but teams are in these based on the results of the PREVIOUS year. So there you have the “two-year” element. (Which actually turns into qualifying for a third tournament in the third year, if you win a European Cup and then the Supercup) to go to the World Club Cup (speaking Football/Soccer right now). But again, no games count as double.

    A “league” and a “playoff” doesn’t leave room for this. It would violate the premise of the definitions for “playoffs”!!!

    BUT, we can solve this by changing the NAME of our official “competition” from League to “Gamerman’s World Rankings”.

    That is the only way we can justify the games counting twice. And we can draw from the Tennis world for this.

    We aren’t a “league” anyway, since in a league, each team/player plays the same amount of game, and have to play each other in a systematic way to determine who comes out on top with the best score on the same amount of games.

    We aren’t really competing that way. We’re individual players that compete H2H and get a score for the collective ranking based on the outcome. That is what they do in Tennis.

    In Tennis, the amount of points collected from the various tournaments in a year sums up into the “rolling” 1 year rankings, counting a full year’s rankings. But they’re ALSO keeping score of the RACE TO LONDON, counting ONLY the points earned in a Calendar Year, to reach The World Tour Finals,  which is an EXTRA tournament for ONLY the 8 best players. These games make a “playoff”, but the games ALSO count in BOTH the H2H between players AND in the World Rankings". 
    (http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/Rankings-Home.aspx)
    (1 Full Year ranking (rolling) -http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/Singles.aspx)
    (YTD - Race to final top 8 tournament - http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/YTD-Singles.aspx)

    Tennis players play different amount of tournaments and games in a year, but they are all in the same ranking system, so it is easy to determine who’s world no. 1,2,3 etc, AND it is easy at the end of the official season to see which players are the top 8 highest ranked players, that get to play the extra tournament AND have the extra points there counted toward their world ranking. And of course, the is a World Tour Final (WTF) Winner crowned as well :)

    Btw, I have a possible SOLUTION for the “double negative” that might come from losing a playoff game AND having it count double as suggested. What if ONLY the winning score is counted?
    In the Tennis WTF you can’t get NEGATIVE points, but you can go through the Top 8 Tournament WITHOUT a point.
    Just a suggestion. Only playoff WINS also count in the League (Or World Rankings as I want to name it).

    Anyway, I make the motion to rename the “league” to a properly named "Gamerman’s World Rankings, which will conclude on an annual basis, leaving the Top 8 players a chance for an extra tournament that will BOTH crown the Champion AND let the games count twice without violating any definitions.

    Some may ask, WHY “GAMERMAN’S World Rankings”?

    Well, most tournaments/rankings has a sponsor (Barclays Premier League, Emirates ATP Race to London, Liga BBVA).
    And no sponsor has more personal investments than Gamer has had making this happen.
    So it is only right to name it such.

    Let’s get rid of the wrongfully applied “league” and introduce the correctly used “World Rankings” that will accommodate for the will of the people without annoying the people with respect for definitions Wink

  • '15 '14

    world rankings

  • '19 '13

    No “sponsor name” honouring the sponsor of the event?

    Like Barclay’s Premier League, UEGA CL, FIFA WC, Liga BBVA?

  • '15 '14

    Question about the whole thing:
    NFL, NBA and co are leagues, too, aren’t they?
    I mean there are 2 versions of leagues: those which have playoffs and those which don’t where the winner is the player/team ranked 1st at the end of the season. However the difference to our league is of course that the amount of games and opponents is not determined yet.

    In general my second thought is that I am fine with the term league.
    However I guess the name “G40 world league” would be more appropriate :)

  • '19 '13

    The point is that historically, every league has had a set amount of players, that all have to play a set amount of games.
    That is the same for all the leagues around the world. That is what a sports league is.
    Playoff or not makes no difference in that respect.

    We’re closer in our organisational form to how Tennis (especially), Chess and Golf are organised.
    Therefore I suggest we move our points, scoring, ranking etc. all into one lump in the same fashion as these other sports. (And yes, I just named Chess a sport, intentionally ;) )

  • '17 '16 '15 '12

    World Ranking is too grand and assuming imo, even though it is reachable from anywhere.

    AA.org 1940 Ranking / Play-offs 20xx

    As for play-off games 2014 counting for 2015 ranking, I dont think it good. Neither double negative nor double positive is sensible, and least of all just “only positive”.

    Saying so even if some players declared for letting games count already and the issue seems settled. Dont want to appeal that, simply seems wrong to me.

    In any case congrats to all players qualifying, a lot of quality all around, tough to qualify.

  • '19 '13

    @alexgreat:

    World Ranking is too grand and assuming imo, even though it is reachable from anywhere.

    AA.org 1940 Ranking / Play-offs 20xx

    As for play-off games 2014 counting for 2015 ranking, I dont think it good. Neither double negative nor double positive is sensible, and least of all just “only positive”.

    Saying so even if some players declared for letting games count already and the issue seems settled. Dont want to appeal that, simply seems wrong to me.

    In any case congrats to all players qualifying, a lot of quality all around, tough to qualify.

    Thanks for pitching in alex!

    Though I can see your point of World Ranking being too grand for modest northern Europeans, it would actually accurately portray the best organised body of players globally as far as I know, at least when it’s available for everybody to join.

    Also, don’t forget that it is an American game, designed by Americans primarily for the American gaming market, operated and run by Americans and the American influence on the naming would only be right! What do I mean with that?

    Well, in MBL, the final series is referred to as World Series, even though only North American teams participate ;)
    So with that tradition in mind, I think World Rankings would be just right! haha

  • '20 '16 '15 '14

    I really think the term “league” is due to the fact that it is club sanctioned play, not to compare it to other “sports” or anything.  :)

    To me, calling it “World Rankings” would mean that you need to include every AAG40 game in the rankings, not just the league games.  All of my chess games are included in the rating system, even though I won’t be playing in a Zonal/Interzonal/World Championship Candidates Final anytime soon.

    You would, imho, also need sanctioning by the makers of the game.  The makers of baseball have an organization called MLB that sanctions the “World Series”.  For a better example, FIFA sanctions the World Cup and FIDE sanctions the World Championship in chess.  So, in addition to sanctioning, we would need a lot more corruption within the club leadership as well…. :D

  • '17 '16 '15 '12

    Had to smile about the “modest” line :)

    Id even play under a grandstanding “World”, as its well organized whatever the name. Just that AA org is not a global body, just reachable from everywhere. The events covered, for example, are all American (although I dont know how many events there are, globally…surely some). If Wizards of the Coast would host the website, thatd be different, I guess. This does not mean that the website is not great, it is, of course.

    The comparison with Tennis is not bad, but in any case, even as the points earned at the Masters count for the computer ranking, they dont count for the race to the Masters in the following year (I think).

    I think there is not much wrong with how the League is structured. There is certainly need for a minimum games to enter the Play offs, and the current number should be manageble.


  • Fun stuff, I’m glad you made the topic, Arathorn

    Lots of thoughts, of course, but for now I’ll just put this one out.

    We ARE badly in need of a good name for these playoffs.  I’ve been stumbling around calling them the “official league playoffs” or “the playoff that will name the league champion” to distinguish it from the “additional playoff(s)”.

    Will cast my vote now!  First, the tough decision of whether to look at the current results BEFORE or AFTER I vote!  :-P


  • I voted before looking at current results…  8-)

  • '19 '13

    @DizzKneeLand33:

    I really think the term “league” is due to the fact that it is club sanctioned play, not to compare it to other “sports” or anything.  :)

    To me, calling it “World Rankings” would mean that you need to include every AAG40 game in the rankings, not just the league games.  All of my chess games are included in the rating system, even though I won’t be playing in a Zonal/Interzonal/World Championship Candidates Final anytime soon.

    You would, imho, also need sanctioning by the makers of the game.  The makers of baseball have an organization called MLB that sanctions the “World Series”.  For a better example, FIFA sanctions the World Cup and FIDE sanctions the World Championship in chess.  So, in addition to sanctioning, we would need a lot more corruption within the club leadership as well…. :D

    If you look up what historically has been “league”, you won’t find anything like what we’re doing now.
    And again, what we’re using now was previously known as “Gamerman’s rankings”, as league standings were determined by win/loss ratio.

    And no, you won’t need to count ALL games into the rankings. Only the voluntary games. Everything else is unranked.
    I am a chess player too, and I sometimes play unranked games online, and OFTEN unranked games as friendlies with piers or in get-togethers. The same would continue.

    And there is NO need for ANY sanctioning from the makers of the game on any level. If you know your chess history you should know that. What did Kasparov do in the 90s? He broke away from Fide, and there were parallel WC until 2006, when they reunified them. The NFL consists of two previously independent leagues, that are now called conferences, with each conference’s winner meeting in the Super Bowl Final. There are often competing sanctioning bodies for the same game/sport.

    We don’t need the sanctioning or approval from anyone. Anyone can form their own sanctioning body.
    Just look at boxing! WBA, WBC, WBO, IBF are the four MAJOR organisations. Then you have several more! Why? People want to do their own thing ;)

    So no, not all games have to be ranked, only declared games (like in other games/sports) and no, we don’t need anyone’s sanctioning.

    :)

  • '19 '13

    @alexgreat:

    Had to smile about the “modest” line :)

    Id even play under a grandstanding “World”, as its well organized whatever the name. Just that AA org is not a global body, just reachable from everywhere. The events covered, for example, are all American (although I dont know how many events there are, globally…surely some). If Wizards of the Coast would host the website, thatd be different, I guess. This does not mean that the website is not great, it is, of course.

    The comparison with Tennis is not bad, but in any case, even as the points earned at the Masters count for the computer ranking, they dont count for the race to the Masters in the following year (I think).

    I think there is not much wrong with how the League is structured. There is certainly need for a minimum games to enter the Play offs, and the current number should be manageble.

    I’m glad you smiled at my comment.

    I would have to refer you to my comments about boxing associations. There are four MAJOR bodies and several more smaller boxing bodies that all operate on their own. That is why you have the FOUR big belts, and why the Klitschko brothers have tried to UNIFY them to become UNDISPUTED. Look at the names of these sanctioning bodies:

    World Boxing Association
    International Boxing Federation
    World Boxing Council
    World Boxing Organization

    They do what they want, and so can we! Lol

  • '19 '13

    @Gamerman01:

    Fun stuff, I’m glad you made the topic, Arathorn

    Lots of thoughts, of course, but for now I’ll just put this one out.

    We ARE badly in need of a good name for these playoffs.  I’ve been stumbling around calling them the “official league playoffs” or “the playoff that will name the league champion” to distinguish it from the “additional playoff(s)”.

    Will cast my vote now!  First, the tough decision of whether to look at the current results BEFORE or AFTER I vote!  :-P

    I’m happy to help!

    I only want the name to change from “league” back to something with Rankings, like your system was called before :)

  • '19 '13

    @alexgreat:

    I think there is not much wrong with how the League is structured.

    This is not about how the League is structured. this is about the name.

    And then my two cents on how to organise and accommodate for the top 8 playoffs (and its name) :)

  • '15 '14

    @arathorn:

    The point is that historically, every league has had a set amount of players, that all have to play a set amount of games.
    That is the same for all the leagues around the world. That is what a sports league is.
    Playoff or not makes no difference in that respect.

    We’re closer in our organisational form to how Tennis (especially), Chess and Golf are organised.
    Therefore I suggest we move our points, scoring, ranking etc. all into one lump in the same fashion as these other sports. (And yes, I just named Chess a sport, intentionally ;) )

    Ok, got it. I agree to this.


  • In short we should name it: ICFPWDTSRLHOABG

    “International competition for people who desire to spend ridiculously long hours on a board game”


  • “Gamerman’s International Axis&Allies Rankings” sounds better tho. World rankings sounds cheesy. I mean sure it could be done. Think about the boxing examples, but karate is a sport that has similar issues. The thing is we have to keep in mind that there are more rankings and more places where you can play axis and allies online. This just happens to be one of them. We are currently using Gamerman’s Ranking system. So I think we should name it after him as we are using his ranking system. If we would change the system, then we change the name, but everything else can stay the way it is.

    If the majority prefers “Gamerman’s World Axis&Allies Rankings” above Gamerman’s International Rankings then thats fine as well, but I am not voting for the world rankings part myself. Whatever the name is going to be, it needs to include Axis&allies at the very least, because that is what we play.

  • '12

    good stuff.

Suggested Topics

  • 12
  • 57
  • 121
  • 20
  • 167
  • 106
  • 135
  • 95
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

39

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts