Deluxe Ski Jump Forum

Hello all ski jumpers

Just made a short brief through both Marathons’ leaderboards, and here some thoughts. I don’t expect everyone to agree, however we can reconsider dividing those (and maybe others) tournaments into 3 groups.
First, some numbers from yesterday Marathons.

Tournament "A"
Rating of each player is counted after tournament.

The average rating of players who score at least one point : 1276
The "Top Ten" average rating : 1591
The average rating of all players in the tournament : 1157
Lowest rating player who scored at least 1 point: 1037 – 22 points on all (40) hills which gave 101position.
There were 204 players, but of course not in all 40 hills.

TOURNAMENT "B"

The average rating of players who score at least one point : 989
The "Top Ten" average rating : 1231
The average rating of all players in the tournament : 952
Lowest rating player who scored at least 1 point: 777 – 3 points in 12 (of 40) hills, which gave 103pos.
There were 130 players, , but of course not in all 40 hills.

As we can see, in Tournament A the average rating is very high in comparison with Tournament B, almost 300 points.
There is also no player with rating less than 1160 in the first 50 of Tournament A.

In comparison, there is no player with rating less than 970 in the first 40 of Tournament B. Why 40 ? Cause there were 70 players more in A, so to keep parities I count 10 less in B.

Also the ratings of "top ten" of each Tournament show that the difference in skills are humongous.
So, the final conclusion:

Why not first only TRY to make a 3 divisions in Tournaments. Make a tournament for example with 2x8 hills, or 3x8 hills and look how it will be.

Tournament A – the so-called "World Class League" – for players rating 1100 – and above
Tournament B – the so-called "Intercontinental League" – for players rating 950 – 1099
And finally Tournament C – the so-called "Amateur League" – for players rating less than 949.

And now:
In Tournament A there were : 109 players "World Class", 63 players "Intercontinental", and 32 players "Amateur".
In Tournament B there were: 22 players "World Class", 40 players "Intercontinental", and 68 players "Amateur".

Dividing them into 3 leagues can give result of : A – 131 competitors, B- 101 competitors, C – 100 competitors.

And, of course – there will be more and more players, I suppose, as I think that every day some people are buying this Hall-of-fame, best-ever, the greatest ski-jumping simulation game

What do you all people think about it ?
Jussi – how do you feel with dividing it into the proposed way ?

No.
A and B is good in my opinion.

cruzzz112 wrote:No.
A and B is good in my opinion.

Very "valuable" answer any pros and cons ?.

Altek wrote:

cruzzz112 wrote:No.
A and B is good in my opinion.

Very "valuable" answer any pros and cons ?.

I like playing with more players. Thus, A and B is just fine.

TPo wrote:

Altek wrote:

cruzzz112 wrote:No.
A and B is good in my opinion.

Very "valuable" answer any pros and cons ?.

I like playing with more players. Thus, A and B is just fine.

OK, but what is the difference when playing with 80 or 170 players, while only 50 can go through Q ?
Of course 50 on each tournament is not enough, but when you have 80 - 100 in each league there is a chance for more or less all players to make at least Q round. When having group A and B only, some of players will never, or hardly ever go through Q round.

OK, but what is the difference when playing with 80 or 170 players, while only 50 can go through Q ?

http://up.servut.us/34903

There is a diffrence. Real problem in marathon was imo, that you got more easily to competition by falling a long jump, rather than landing a decent jump. 80 people at first round at planica is a weird sight.

80 people at first round? How is it possible ? only 40 can pass through Q, + 3 or 4 players. So why 80 ?

Altek wrote:80 people at first round? How is it possible ? only 40 can pass through Q, + 3 or 4 players. So why 80 ?

Fall at 95%+ of the winners length qualifies.

TPo wrote:

Altek wrote:80 people at first round? How is it possible ? only 40 can pass through Q, + 3 or 4 players. So why 80 ?

Fall at 95%+ of the winners length qualifies.

I will probably add an option to disable the rule. At the Marathon B there was no problem with this rule as people were not crashing on purpose.

And Tournament C will be included if the number of players gets increasing.

Surely it will

I think the best option is make 80 or 100 player limit for each group and make 2 groups for A, and 2 groups for B. With such number the falling rule won't be such a problem as it is now. And rating is changing too fast in those sessions, so maybe just make it change after all hills, based on final position. I mean if we have an average player, who did few nice jumps and go up to 1300 it doesn't show his/her true skill, but if he's really good then he can make 250 or more points after 40 hills. Especially now, when you can't join B, but you had aspiration to join A and make few points and now your rank doesn't show your skill.

I'll drop in for the next marathon. Couldent stay yesterday because I had to fix my bike

Jussi Koskela wrote:

TPo wrote:

Altek wrote:80 people at first round? How is it possible ? only 40 can pass through Q, + 3 or 4 players. So why 80 ?

Fall at 95%+ of the winners length qualifies.

I will probably add an option to disable the rule. At the Marathon B there was no problem with this rule as people were not crashing on purpose.

Why not limit it to allow a maximum of 10 longest crashes to take part, for example?

Good idea! Or 95% in first round only, not in Q.
Sorry for my English.