Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Needel
I am split having not played the game yet. I can tell you that there is an element of this ranking system that I like and it is the removal of pressure on each individual match. In pas years at large events such as the championship if you lose 1 or 2 matches you have dropped way down in the rankings. People always seem to talk about "lucky pairings" but I would argue there are just as many "unlucky pairings" and most teams are going to lose a few matches.
I DO NOT endorse starting the regional with no other strategy than scoring for your opponents, but I do feel that the 6v0 is within the spirit of this game and a necessary evil.
If I could change the ranking system I would change it to this.
Winner - Same as now (winner score + 2x the losers score)
Loser - Gets the winners points PLUS their own points
In many matches the ranking points would be as close as they are now. If a team decides to go 6v0 they still get the same score, but it gives incentive for a team to try and score for themselves and for the opponents to help their competitors and score for them. Basically what it breaks down to is any ball scored by the loser in their own goal or opponent's goal goes right to their ranking score. So why would you score for your opponent 100% when winning gives you a notable advantage and it doesn't hurt you if you try to win and fail. Thoughts?
A few examples (disregard penalties)
Blue loses 5-3 Blue gets 8 points Red gets 11
Blue loses 7-1 Blue Gets 8 points Red gets 9
Blue loses 6-5 Blue gets 11 Red gets 16
Blue Loses 8-0 Blue gets 8 Red Gets 8
|
This is much better than the current system (and better than not scoring opponent balls), at least it gives "some" incentive to the loser and hence more incentive for the winner not to 6v0. However the loser still has more incentive to score in the opponents goal than their own so as to not help out the opponents ranking.