GIANTS'2012 REVIEW(very long)
Posted By: Michael Petch In Response To: GIANTS'2012 REVIEW(very long) (Iancho Hristov)
Date: Monday, 23 January 2012, at 7:18 p.m.
In Response To: GIANTS'2012 REVIEW(very long) (Iancho Hristov)
Iancho wrote: "It is true Giants List have some flaws and this is why i posted this beacuse i care to change it-before 2 years i suggested that point system should be changed, "
I think this is the crux of the matter. In 2009 I got the distinct feeling that there was a growing concern that the list itself is flawed. I have no issue with people challenging the list, or getting it changed, or creating a completely new one. IMHO - At the moment, there is noting immoral or unethical about campaigning for others and yourself, given how the list itself is currently conducted.
The flip side is a list completely generated by a mathematical formula(s) and a set of rules based on actual performance. You could go with a strict no voting needed, then campaigning is irrelevant. Skill is required to achieve your ranking on the list.
Unfortunately, the likelyhood you'd ever find a formula that will make people happy isn't likely.
As well some people may have higher PRs but are well recognized ambassadors of the game. I think some subjective components should be considered.
Hypothetically speaking, let us say that Xavier became a solid 5.0 PR player. I for one would like to have a system that rewards what an individual may do outside their error rate or their win/loss ratio, that betters the game overall.
I think the list is too subjective, and lacks a set of standards which makes it almost exclusively a Backgammon popularity contest, and that is strictly what I see it as. Yamin Yamin does a great job with this, but I think what is clear is that players around the world would like to see it change.
Messages In This Thread
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.