POLL: new ranking system proposal

Hi,

I'd like to share a new ranking proposal based on the classical poker pay-out, a zero sum system.
It's a KISS model which does not need any penalty factor because it's a sum, not an average score.
It can seem a bit cruel, but poker is cruel. That's why we all must learn, learn how to win and, maybe more important, learn how not to loose too much and still have fun.

First, the score can be a positive or a negative number. It represents the "money" you would have won or lost. A kind of return on investment (ROI).

The system ( note that i talk about 10 players games):
1) playing a game cost one point (-1): it represents the "buy-in" and create the amount to win (the pot), usually 10 points.
2) at the end of the game, the "pay-out":
the 1st takes 6.5 points out of 10 in the pot, so he/she wins +5.5 (6.5 - the buy in)
2nd takes 2.5 points (so +1.5)
3rd takes 1 point that just covers the buy in, his/her money back (so +0 score)
others (4th to 10th) loose one point (so -1)

and that's all.

High scores like 100 or more are only reachable by a huge number of games, something like 70 games for best players... Low skills players won't never reach such a score 'cause it will drop by the time...
New account with less than 30 games can't reach high score, +30/+40 at best...

For best understanding I give you some exemples:

http://www.poker-heroes.com/profile.html?user=gegego1
-200 in 226 games, so an Average Profit (AP) -0.8850

http://www.poker-heroes.com/profile.html?user=chanteiro
-24.5 in 54 games, so AP= -0.4537

http://www.poker-heroes.com/profile.html?user=rocklover
+3.5 in 12 games so AP= +0.2917

http://www.poker-heroes.com/profile.html?user=kikibasket
+5.5 in 11 games so AP= +0.5

http://www.poker-heroes.com/profile.html?user=WvN
+38 in 28 games so AP= +1.3571

http://www.poker-heroes.com/profile.html?w=1&user=OneAndOnly&sc=&gender=&start=0&anz=50
+109 in 99 games so AP= +1.101

http://www.poker-heroes.com/profile.html?w=1&user=P00P&sc=&gender=&start=0&anz=50
+92.5 in 94 games so AP= +0.9840

http://www.poker-heroes.com/profile.html?w=1&user=AAtila&sc=&gender=&start=0&anz=50
+74.5 in 85 games so AP= +0.8765

http://www.poker-heroes.com/profile.html?user=jeanflush
+28 in 59 games so AP= +0.4746

Someone who played 30 games and score +30 is very good players 'cause he/she makes and average profit of 1 (he/she pays 1 to win 2, which make 1 profit): we can say that he/she plays in a profitable way, that means that he/she deserves a top ranking place...Simple.

A good contest could be: to reach a 100+ score with the lesser number of games. Or the same with a 200 score.

What do you think about this system?
Good, bad or something to adjust?
Feel free to leave any comment and VOTE!


edit 5 december: boehmi told me that not to favour hardcore players vs occasional ones we must calculate the "average profit" (the score in my system is the "profit", we just have to divide it by the number of games) and then apply a penalty factor under 30, 50 or "n" games. This "average profit" is the final ranking score. I also edited the average profit in the exemple above.

to me it looks interesting

good,
so you can vote for

I like the idea of a buy in. At the beginning of a season everyone starts with an equal set amount and they buy in to each game. If they win, they get rewarded, if they lose they lose part of their season earnings. I am not sure if I like the idea if they lose to many games they are out for the season, this discourages people from playing.

I have played 10 player games where it is broken down like this.
1st 50% of prize pool.
2nd 30% of prize pool.
3rd 20% of prize pool.
You could also pay the bubble and return the forth player's buy in.

I like the idea of keeping it simple however I don't want to discourage people from playing. Some people can play every night, some people can only play once a week.

Example:
Game cost $100 to play.
Ten players, $1000 prize pool
1st - $450
2nd - $270
3rd - $180
4th - $100

I like your idea Jean-Flush but I am not sure it will encourage the casual player to come back and keep playing.

I used this page for a quick reference. There are many apps and other pages to calculate this information.
http://www.homepokertourney.com/payout.htm

Ok, I understand your though.
You agree the idea but you prefer a softer pay-off structure, something more distributive.

Can I ask to vote? The "Yes, but..." answer is made for you