We believe that it is important to find out the real good player. We will need an additional ranking! Please read and take part of the ideas and discussions...

"Real Score & Ranking - Real Strength of Players": www.pokerth.net/forum/29-score/6138-real...ngth-of-players.html

"Ideas for Scoring & Ranking Calculation": www.pokerth.net/forum/29-score/6032-idea...ing-calculation.html

We think there has to be an additional parameter in the scoring calculation. It should depends on what kind of player you are playing against. What kind of player are sitting around a table. And not only the winning is important. When I prefer to play against low positioned player (like a lot of the Top 100 player do) and got good placement and maybe won the game, why should this has the same value and quality as a good placement/win in a ranking game without bad player? We need an incentive for playing against good player. And we need a (additional) ranking of really good player!!!

It is not hard to balance. It's just a mathematical thing, an easy solution. No problem for the programmers of PokerTH. The easy way is to add all the average or ranking positions etc. (whatever you take) from the player sitting at table and to divide by 10 (number of player) and to set this in relation to your placement after the game. That's it and easy to realize.

With this kind of optimizing the scoring and ranking game calculation will be very different in the future. It won't be possible to climb high in ranking like now. It will be much more important for player focused on ranking to look for better player to play against instead of looking for rooms full of windfall, just for getting good ranking in an easy way.

Michael & friends

Hello Michael.

Man, you really think things over, don´t you! Sounds all pretty reasonable to me. I slowly wave good bye to this premium league idea; yours might be the real thing.

One little annotation:It´s this very relation I think is hard to balance, but there certainly are some brighter heads than mine who can put that together. It´s definitely worth a try.

Now I go and check out your links...

See you at the tables.
Little Rock

Hello Michael.

The longer I think about it the better I like your idea. It solves almost every problem I can think of (concerning PokerTH) and it doesn´t sound too complicated to implement.

Just one more little thing, and again it smells a bit like the premium league... Imagine you really want to give yourself a hard time and play let´s say the top 200 only. (I would like to do that from time to time.) You could use your filters when you set up your game room but you often will not find enough active top 200 players to fill such a table. Do you think we could offer smaller tables for such a purpose? I also think we´d need a different ranking algorithm for that games, right?

Maybe this idea is a little bit over the top, but there MUST be a way to get the best players together! I can´t stop thinking about it.

So long

Little Rock

I'm moving this thread to the Poker-Heroes section because it is now a discussion about ranking calculation.

You want to play serious poker and get rid of stupid gamblers? Ask for a decent blind structure!

IMHO, the current blind structure is way too aggressive and is partly responsible for the behaviour of some players.
Who can blame them? They tried to do that a couple of times and it works with such a fast blind stucture!

Don't get me wrong, as long as there's no money involved in a poker game, we won't see serious poker but it's a first step.

I know i mentionned this issue several times before in my posts and the structure is not likely to change but... Argh! This is so frustrating
I even tend to wonder if the developpers know anything about poker by sticking to such an awful feature...

It is kind of pointless to argue unless someone from the developer side tells us what kind of solution they actually want... But oh well.

> It is not hard to balance. It's just a mathematical thing, an easy solution.

Uh, no. Such ranking algorithms are *really* hard to implement so they are truly fair. Elo variants are pretty much state of the art, with TrueSkill and friends offering a bit more refined solutions. This blog post is quite a good introduction to the topic.

As the dev team has so far not shown any sign to be willing to dive into this sort of mathematical background - and I don't blame them - I would hugely favor some easy fix like divisions. At least that's pretty easy to do and will probably work.

> You want to play serious poker and get rid of stupid gamblers? Ask for a decent blind structure!

+1

I'd vote doubling until 800, then linear in 800 steps. At around 1600 the short stacks at small tables will probably have around 10 BBs left, at which point there should be a lot of pushing and it should get to heads-up in a reasonable timeframe.