Well jim, I guess to answer your question why I played Amateur Doubles, I felt like sandbagging way beyond my natural rank...
and im going to play it again this year with Bruce. because we can. After all Slice/. I stand a rebel against the systematics of a chaotic point system..

Besides slice/ the players that will be playing in this year's AD event, will be the same kind of players we all play against on a weekly bases.. that we all win and lose against on a weekly bases, except for a minor few that lead the state as of this wing of time..




jedi

Umm...no

Expert Doubles
1 Will S / Christof D
2 Garrick Wren / Mohammed Uddin
3 Drew Y / Darryl Pimpinho
4 Laura C / Robert Hays
5 Jack C / Ryan Knapton
5 Frank M / David Council
7 Art M / Brendan F
7 Mike Prieto / Eddy "Fast Eddy" Lueras
9 Jason Wicks / Joe T
9 Fe R / Michael Stahl
9 Scott R / Mike R
9 Tim Walters / Moose M



Sickof2ndand3rdplacefinishes2014PIMP

Edited by user Saturday, September 6, 2014 1:58:24 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Then all your self praising rambling is just a bunch of BS.
The cool thing is that you could win AD or place anywhere lower and you still lose. Credibility already out the window.
Stop talking oh mighty amateur Jedi.

^ This!

This is going to be quite easy to understand for most.

1. Foos is one of the most kick ass fun games/hobby/sports/ around.
2. Competitive foos is supposed to be just that, competitive.
3. Players who dominate in a city like Denver and beyond for umpteen years, have no business playing in Rook or Am. events, regardless of what the jacked up point system says.
4.^Refer to 3.

MicDropTrashy

I don't know if I'd have a problem with Trashy playing AM's now (at CO state where you know tons of other awesome AM's will be there).

The points are so messed up that you have ex pros in expert, so it only makes sense that AM has expert caliber players in there.

It's all so subjective...on a case by case basis. I think Dustin is an AM no big deal, but if they dropped Knapton or Moose down...it would clearly be a gap in talent level. Even if the best AM's might be able to knock off Moose or Future here and there, they certainly don't stand a chance all things being equal. I think that's the goal of ranks - to allow people of similar skill to compete against each other.

You can't just say "points are jacked, so who cares...". That argument only benefits the best players in each rank. The true in each rank get screwed.

The best you can do is have local promoters who are super fair assign ranks on those few exceptions. These ranking issues are really only dealing with a handful of players - those that play a lot, but don't play rated tourneys.

X

Edited by user Sunday, September 7, 2014 3:33:45 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

X, If you were dropped to 1300 in both singles and dubs would you play Am?

Trashy

Pffft... Scott, you have much more business playing Am than I would. ;)


Trashy

Edited by user Sunday, September 7, 2014 8:03:08 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

You get 2 points every time you show up, so 32 of your points are just for being there. Which means only 18 victory points, which sounds about right for an amateur level player. I am pretty sure if Bolson attended 16 Americas tourneys that he would have 50 points as well.

Edited by user Monday, September 8, 2014 9:57:27 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified