I, for one, really appreciate JSA's effort here. I don't think he'll change anything in [20] for the worse, mainly because he's always willing to take criticism on his ideas. By discussing things with the some of the oldest and best members of [20], I'm sure a good agreement on settings, members, and such will be determined.

So bottom line, for everyone else here, take it easy on him, he's doing his best. And secondly, thanks JSA!

big ego is big

All thanks to me for reminding you all :)

I think 20 died because of the inactivity of its members, (me for example). So, unless you get new members into 20, nothing you do will change anything.

can i join the proving grounds too JSA?

how can you tell things like that?
do you know these players' records against other players (who are top in your opinion) than you?
also, i'd like to hear how you decide who is good enough for [20] and who isn't (if "sze" or "gui" said, it doesn't matter, they have different opinions from other people like all of us) unless the player reached 1st in ladder.
i perfectly disagree with your lists.
first off, in my opinion some of the "top" players are not even "very good".
second off, some of the players that you put in B should be A.
who decided that???
do you know who was beaten by the B league players?
For example, I have positive records against most of the league A players and you included me in B. there are more league B players im sure can beat the league A players (like Luxis) but i dont want to speak for them.
btw, i was invited to [20] A league but declined because i didnt like 2 of the templates, and in fact i dont want to join this group.

I agree anytime you have a list decided by someone (1 person, a group, etc), there will be omissions because it is opinion. Why not just let the ladder decide who is in that group?

thats what i meant, but what about the nonmembers?

I completely agree with brisk and I in my opinion he is a prime example of underrated players, though I dislike rating players at all. I think that rating players will be always hard, and it should be clear when someone does a "rating" that it is a personal opinion, no more. Because no one can speak for the whole community when it comes to rating someone as it is a mere opinion based on nothing but personal experience.

Also, I agree with Chris that the ladder serves as the best way to rate players on 1v1 Medium Earth. But it contains several flaws. Brisk mentions non-members, there are also players who can't find the time or are to bored with the template to play the ladder (e.g. me) or players who will get underrated only because they don't play that particular map all too often.

Brisk, It is definitely possible you will be up in A League this season. I was going off of who Gui invited last season as far as I could tell. That is why I am planning on having some anonymous judges pick which guys are in each division so that we don't have just one guy. The orginal idea was to have 5 of them. But I might up it to 7 if a lot of good players want to help judge. The way it sounds though, many A Leaguers from a couple seasons ago will decline again, and you and Luxis are definitely 2 of the first guys I would move up even if the judges agree you aren't good enough for A League right off the bat. I am unsure of who exactly the judges will be yet, but I have a few guys who will probably be. Once I get a panel of judges, then we will discuss who should be in A League and who will make it if a lot of the guys decline or have retired from warlight.

Chris and Luxis, I don't know how well the ladder judges though. If we're going off of someone like dunga and zibik who are constantly in the top 5, they are obviously very good players. But some guys will crack the top 10 early on and then sink to about 20-30 where they actually belong. Or it could work the oppositte way and it can be like Simba who started in the 20s and worked his way up to the top 10. I feel like if they can stay around the same rating though, that is an accurate portrayal of their skill. I think checking out their games and seeing if they are as good as their ratings suggests is very important. And also if the judges have played against them recently, which is highly likely with good, active players, they can look off of that game to get more proof of their skill level.

I don't know how season II goes, I did not join it, but i can immediately see the potential problems with season III.

i) the set of good players grew a lot

Back when Gui founded 20 there was actually no confusion about 60 players, we tried voting to start things off (rating 1-5 with 0 meaning "don't know enough about the player"). Averaging out we made somewhat workable leagues, now I am similarily sure how top 5 list would look like, but not how top 20 would look like, borders do seem blurry there. Anyway the point of segmenting it into leagues of 20 was to make RR tournaments (elimination tournaments without seeds make no sense... unless you want to make like 100 of them). I think we started off ok the first time, might be a good idea to do that again, pair up 1-20 2-19 etc. from votes, similarily for 3vs3. Not perfect, but since there are so many new good players, i don't see any other way around it.

ii) participation

Yup, back in the good old days (when Monsenhor actually played) everyone was active. Now everyone won 10-20 tournaments and are sick of RR's (especially since they are very committing). For example I know that if Gui, Salah, myhand, HHH and Fatih decline (i don't dream about Monsenhor returning) I definitely would not play. Also season I took like 6 months to end, there were some upsets caused by boots, but in general it was fine. Now, I fear that when the core is mostly burned out, it might result in lack of motivation and further boots.

iii) leadership?

Since we can clearly see how upset people are that there will be some kind of arbitrary judgment passed on them, there needs to be one person authorative enough to uphold the decisions that are made. JSA, if you are willing, go ahead, i'll gladly help.


Anyway guys, my recommendations is first a public discussion about templates, then just mass vote... Yeah, it has a lot of flaws, but without global ELO or a huge statistical sample, every result will be more-less arbitrary.

The initial ranking of the |20| league was decided by a poll of all who were invited by Gui. It were 60 players, if i remember correctly. You cant expect such a ranking to be as unbiased as that member ladder. On the other hand, the ladder prefers players who like to play multi-day games on the medium earth map. A lot of good players i know prefer realtime and i.e. the Asia or Europe map. So i dare to say we would get different rankings depending on the map and game settings. Nevertheless, these rankings give a good hint of the capabilities of a player. And, if a player gets at the top or close of it in different ranking environments, then you can be pretty sure he is an outstanding good player.

The ranking itself is nothing i really could get fun of. The fun part for me is teammates you can communicate with and a nice and quick game i can forget about as quickly as i played it. Its all just bits and bytes. And a well programed computer algorithm could outplay any human player. Like it is the fact in chess since Deep Blue 1997 (dedicated hardware) or Deep Fritz 2006 (PC).

I'm just glad I am not good enough to worry about missing a cut off in either system :)

I'm going to start off trying to find the 20 best players who are still active. I am going to use a system similar to dunga's playoff with 3 points awarded to 5 players, 2 points awarded to 5 players, and 1 point awarded to 10 players. I will ask about 10 guys who were in [20] in the past and are very active players who would know a lot of the guys. Once I add up the points, the top 15 will definitely be invited. And then we'll decide between guys ranked 16-25 to see the 5 who make it in. Once the A League tournaments have started, then we will take the best players left and make B League with a similar style. After that, I will work on Proving Ground League A and work my way down to Proving Ground League C. Each league will be the same, except for different level of players. After Proving Ground League C, I might start another section for beginners and less experienced players who aren't good enough for Proving Ground, and use the same settings.

After that, I plan on doing a vote between [20] players on whether to do a series of 3 1v1 double elimination tournaments (16 players), 2 2v2's (8 teams), 2 3v3's (8 teams, will have 4 of the best players from B League play as well), and 1 4v4 (4 teams) with points awarded for how far you make it in each tournament. Or to do 4 round robin tournaments, a 1v1, a 2v2, a 3v3, and a 4v4 (B League included) (1 point for each win). The second option is how the last 2 seasons have been and are more accurate i think but the first option requires less commitment and more motivation. Settings are still to be decided.

Rankings (original intent): Flux is good. New, up and coming players or those few know about can join B league one season to prove themselves and be in A league the next. Season 2 has many such players in the B league. Ultimately, for 20 to rank players accurately, at least 3-4 seasons will need to have been played. Results determining rank is the best way I think. One guy might win 1-3 games more than another by chance/luck/good fortune, but across time results balance out and the cream rises to the top.

Tournaments (original intent): I had hoped players would have joined all game modes (1v1, 2v2, 3v3, 4v4) and had each one a different map (none on ME, the ladders and HHH's RRs serve the ME crowd) in order to measure overall ability (unlike Fizzer's ladders) and geo-strategic adaptability. Being able to play Medium Earth well after 500-1000 ME games played and after watching or studying how to play that map is not a measure of strategic ability so much as a measure of pattern recognition, the ability to imitate, and winning a few paper, scissors, rock turns/orders/card orders. For 20 to play ME 1v1s or 2v2s as if it were Fizzer's ladders would be a joke. The best overall players can play any map. The first 20 season catered to ME specialists to some extent in the initial (voted) rankings, which distorted teams a bit. Why make the same mistake twice? ME specialists have Lolwut's and HHH's tournaments and Fizzer's ladders. If they are afraid or unable to compete well on other maps, they won't. No need to cater to their limited abilities in a way to make their limited abilities appear unlimited. In some respects, 20 was a "proving ground": prove you can compete on maps other than ME with normal settings.

I agree with Mosq. Having a real-time tournament of 20 players would be best. Sometimes results in games are simply a matter of which top player is the more active puppet-master. It's easier to be a puppet-master in multi-day games. Real-time with shorter autoboot times are better ways to ensure players let others play more for themselves and the puppet-masters simply offer advice from time to time, rather than control every move and order.

I also agree with Bishes. RRs become dull. Double-elimination would be more fun. But it would be harder to allocate points on a fair basis, especially if the teams are not balanced. Using a ranking system like how myhand and unknown did in their Managers League would help.

what about an c team for the worst of b leauge playing with the best of proving ground?

Go youtube. Search "lion kills lion" or "lion kills tiger." You find 20 tournaments. No need ask questions. No need talk talk talk like Gui Szee or Jsa monkeys.

Lion like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-wvA7fmUJ4&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Lolowut and Dunga appear at end to analyse fight.