ESR - (Archive) Vo0 is #1 Dueler In GGL World Rankings

<< Comment #1 @ 03:08 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

LoCK

I REALLY think this would work better if you did a separate ranking for each game as it doesn't get fair this way. The 16 PK players have a big advantage. =(

5%

<< Comment #2 @ 03:12 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Carmac - Reply to #1

The 16 PK players are on their way out of the ranking very soon.

<< Comment #7 @ 03:43 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Ztrider - Reply to #2

they are ?

<< Comment #9 @ 03:51 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Carmac - Reply to #7

Shut up, smartass or you're getting the korvhalsband!

<< Comment #11 @ 04:20 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Ztrider - Reply to #9

Give it to me ! ;)

Edited by Ztrider at 04:20 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #3 @ 03:12 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ar4s - Reply to #1

...whats PK?

<< Comment #4 @ 03:16 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

TosspoT - Reply to #3

PoKer

7%

<< Comment #5 @ 03:17 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

nothx - Reply to #4

caw

<< Comment #176 @ 17:58 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

dadS - Reply to #5

blackbird?

<< Comment #19 @ 08:26 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

rDmr - Reply to #3

pimp killers

<< Comment #6 @ 03:21 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Cash - Reply to #1

PK players had their fair shot, but should continue to excell in other games/tournaments. They will be gone quickly.

<< Comment #33 @ 10:14 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

LEOPOLD STOTCH - Reply to #1

høh-

lets just enjoy that fatty wasnt number one, wich prob stains on his pride like a fist in that place the sun never shines.

<< Comment #113 @ 14:07 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

eLy - Reply to #33

if make rankings based on my bedroom i'm number one too.

<< Comment #118 @ 14:17 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

LEOPOLD STOTCH - Reply to #113

you are always number one honney

*HUGS*

<< Comment #142 @ 15:57 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

baron Railgun - Reply to #1

"world ranking of players across the major dueling games"
what do you want, if this was the only major dueling game last year ?
:D
what's up with q3 then ? :(

<< Comment #143 @ 16:05 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

LoCK - Reply to #142

In the future: be aware of jokes, they usually have something to do with how small the PK-community were!

<< Comment #145 @ 16:09 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

baron Railgun - Reply to #143

:/

<< Comment #149 @ 16:25 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

LoCK - Reply to #145

Sorry, my comment sounded quite harsh. That was not my intention. =)

<< Comment #156 @ 16:44 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

baron Railgun - Reply to #149

no! I know what you said but I was asking myself......
:/ aka "hmmmmm... right or wrong? dunno"
is OK with PK as a major fps for gaming community when q-s have a much more bigger community (for ex) or NOT ? dunno
I think I found my answer :) in my last comment

<< Comment #238 @ 16:14 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

Jamerio ' - Reply to #1

I think it's more worrying that the idea of the list was compiled to help people running tourneys to rank people.

There is one major oversight in the compilation of the list. It assumes that the skill gap in all games is equal. When in fact the highest level of play is inside Q3.
That does not mean PK and UT2K4 are not worth a mention, but there needs to be some kind of scalable ratio between games.

If peeps want to do a list like this they should make it smaller and simply come up with AN ACCURATE representation, instead of one which is not only out of date, but one that could take at least 6 months to show some sort of truth.
In that time people without a clue could use it as a basis for totally screwing up a tourney.
I hope it gets reduced to the top 25. I dunno about you, but I don't give a shit if CZM and Zero 4 have been inactive for a while. I still know they would cream about 99.9% of the competitive FPS players on the scene.
And if they turn up to a tourney you can bet your last dollar they probably will.
There's obviously a lot of work that went into it, but it would have been a 1000 times more useful had they simply made it smaller and more accurate.
As it stands you've got a ton of players who made the list and are above other players. So I'm really against such a list.
It's ill informed and if it was used for tourney seeds (which is partly why it's been compiled) then you're in for one hell of a frustrating tourney.

Jam

P.S.
Yes I know the lsit will autoupdate, but that will take ages. In the meantime it's simply a list of above average FPS gamers.

Edited by Jamerio at 16:20 GMT, 27th Jan 2006

<< Comment #242 @ 17:54 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (212.0.77.135) - Reply to #238

When in fact the highest level of play is inside Q3 - agree with you dont worry the first big lan will be showing who best dueller in the world...

Zero4 being the best dueler blab lablbalbl he havent proven anything since 2003 afaik, nothing in more then 2 years, shouldnt even be in a list like this then... doesnt matter how great you once we're - ztriders comment - =)))

<< Comment #246 @ 19:15 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

ini - Reply to #242

Yeah 2nd place with USA team at ESWC 2004 and 2nd place at Qcon 2004 is prooving nothink.

Edited by ini at 19:15 GMT, 27th Jan 2006

<< Comment #260 @ 17:11 UTC, 29 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #238

I think you totally missed the point, not for the first time either. It wasnt designed to be used by tournaments to rank players, because? it shows all games not just one. As for skill ranking in a game, thats an age old argument and doesnt wash with me im afraid.

Its your opinion I guess, but fortunately hardly anyone gives a rats arse about what you think.

<< Comment #8 @ 03:49 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Fortress

How are zyz, Ztrider and Stermy over cooller? oO

P.S.: Those Brits %) jk

Edited by Fortress at 03:50 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #17 @ 07:52 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

InFeRn0^ - Reply to #8

because they played pk and won more money?

<< Comment #40 @ 10:38 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

hnns - Reply to #17

Since when is money a measurement of skill? Cooller has won far more tourneys and prestige.

Edited by hnns at 16:34 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #42 @ 10:45 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

InFeRn0^ - Reply to #40

in 2005?

<< Comment #43 @ 10:46 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

InFeRn0^ - Reply to #40

more money = more important tournament -> more points

<< Comment #72 @ 11:53 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

dezje - Reply to #43

yes, or maybe he just won more tournaments in times when there was less money to earn, huh, smartass?

<< Comment #75 @ 12:02 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

InFeRn0^ - Reply to #72

this list is only based on last year :/

<< Comment #78 @ 12:12 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Carillo - Reply to #75

And, frankly, it's just a list which tellls of their today's skill-levels as much as hmm... say today's temperature tells us about global warming.

<< Comment #79 @ 12:14 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

InFeRn0^ - Reply to #78

how is that, people that win tournaments are noobs? And ppl who havent won money own everybody who win money? I dont get it

<< Comment #80 @ 12:22 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Carillo - Reply to #79

Yes, you obviously don't get it.

I didn't disagree with your comment, I agreed with it and added more input, perspective so to speak. Get it now?

<< Comment #81 @ 12:25 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

InFeRn0^ - Reply to #80

ok if you agree with me you are right

<< Comment #167 @ 17:45 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

oda - Reply to #81

What he said is that the current form of players is only a glimpse of the future.

<< Comment #92 @ 13:00 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

dezje - Reply to #75

so you're agreeing with me? k thnx

<< Comment #94 @ 13:05 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

InFeRn0^ - Reply to #92

not really

<< Comment #115 @ 14:14 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

dezje - Reply to #94

u so stoopid

<< Comment #117 @ 14:17 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

InFeRn0^ - Reply to #115

did cooller win more tourneys last year than vo0?

<< Comment #120 @ 14:23 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

dezje - Reply to #117

stooooooooopid

<< Comment #121 @ 14:25 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

InFeRn0^ - Reply to #120

stupid with an o? you must be really an idiot

<< Comment #130 @ 15:32 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #40

Gah, it's past 12 months world ranking based on rules -- not subjective fanawards based on human evaluation. I don't see why you got agressive on him unless it was something personal x)

<< Comment #131 @ 15:33 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #130

blabla rules made by humans -- just don't.

<< Comment #198 @ 19:13 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

InFeRn0^ - Reply to #131

because he cant read :)

<< Comment #10 @ 04:08 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

mefajpE^

ZeRo4 should be first despite of all big earnigs. He just deserved it.

Edited by mefaipe at 04:13 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #101 @ 13:39 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Lethe - Reply to #10

cmon you don't count z4.
it's like saying
- Bryant is the best !
- No, Michael Jordan is !
get it?

7%

<< Comment #148 @ 16:18 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

penta - Reply to #101

not its not the same, even comparing kobe to jordan is silly. the pussy no defense league thats played now is silly compared to the physical 80s-90s nba.

<< Comment #231 @ 11:56 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

Lethe - Reply to #148

no defense now? is this a joke?
you know, detroit won the title thanx to ultra - kill - everyone defense.
and nba never had like 72:62 results like in last couple of years. if that's not a sign of defense-play, i don't know what is.

<< Comment #237 @ 15:59 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

penta - Reply to #231

well its couse of the rules changes, if you havnt noticed it yourself you havnt watched the nba very long.
read this if you still dont know what iam talking about
http://www.nba.com/blog/blog30.html#

<< Comment #253 @ 11:49 UTC, 28 January 2006 >>

By

Ignignokt - Reply to #148

What? There were loads of teams in the 80's that had absolutely no defense. Like the Denver Nuggets. Game was way more open and teams ran much more. The only team really to change that were the Bad Boys Pistons at the end of the 80's. And the Pistons still managed to play in the highest scoring game of all time.

7%

<< Comment #103 @ 13:40 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Carmac - Reply to #10

Even though he played three maps of Quake 3 within the last 12 months?

11%

<< Comment #232 @ 11:56 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

Lethe - Reply to #103

of course it doesn't matter carmac, its 04 ffs =)

<< Comment #127 @ 14:48 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ScanX - Reply to #10

some people have hard time understanding the most simple ranking

7%

<< Comment #12 @ 05:25 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

zeicon

Fatal1ty is gonna sue GGL's ass!

btw. why is fox placed higher than toxic? Didn't toxic place higher in both CPL Winter and DH? (EDIT: Oh, I guess it goes all the way back to Q3 ESWC as well?)

Edited by Zeicon at 05:38 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #13 @ 05:43 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

jester!

I really like the idea.

Sure people will disagree with placements, but people disagree with the US College football rankings in the AP and Coaches poll, so they make something somewhat mathematical in the BCS system and people still complain. :>

It should be cool seeing people climb up and fall down the ranks as more cometitions take place.

<< Comment #14 @ 07:16 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Ben

Redeye knows my opinion on this, excellent idea. And as you should know by now month by month events drop off the calender which means the vast majority(when i say vast.. 80% of the 16) of PK players will lose a foothold in the ranking as it begins to update it self with this years events.

Based on the ATP rankings i cant see too many people cry over it being unfair, why isn't zero4 first? Because he's done nothing in the last calender year, why is fox above toxic? higher placing at eswc, 3rd place finish at cpl winter and the global insignificance of DH means fox is over toxic.. should toxic win the first stop and fox come 3rd or something then toxic will leap frog due to the importance of the world tour

"How are zyz, Ztrider and Stermy over cooller?"

last year cooller won ESWC

last year zyz finished 2nd-5th at each world tour stop, ztrider 1st - 6th and stermy 3rd-5th, due to last WT having 9 stops the 9 ultimatly count for more over the single ESWC event last year

get me?

<< Comment #16 @ 07:48 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

jonjay - Reply to #14

It makes sense but your comparing different games. Your making a league based on different games which makes no sense. If your going to do that then might aswell count all the asian players which will dominate that league. Another example of how flawed the league is the start comparing sportsman in tennis and football, you just cant do that. You cant do that because in tennis you have more tournaments throughout the year whereas in football, you have league and cup etc..

Edited by jonjay at 07:50 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

3%

<< Comment #52 @ 10:59 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

swy - Reply to #16

so true man

<< Comment #87 @ 12:37 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #16

same reply as I gave on page 2, but posted here for you too.

Ok you make a valid point and here is the answer. Part of my role (as I see it) as a media person covering esports is to make it more mainstream friendly. That doesnt mean change the games played or influence people to like it, just make it more understandable.

As part of that idea I developed this multi gaming 1v1 ranking because I viewed 1v1 players as a kind of breed of players, regardless of game played. For instance, last year PK was the world tour game, this year its Q4 and next year it might be something else (1v1 related) and the players seem to move on to the "next" game nowadays, where as in the past they may have stayed in one game they liked more. Im generalising I know, however stay with me. How I see 1v1 players is not as Quake players or UT players or PK players etc, its more that I see them as 1v1 duellers regardless of game, which then led on to this work being carried out across all games 1v1 FPS.

You use the analogy of basketball and baseball ranked together, however the way I see this ranking is more that they are all tennis players (1v1 FPS duellers) its just the surface (the game) that changes, but they are still ranked accordingly throughout a year of tennis (1v1 duelling). If we can get mainstream to understand the whole 1 versus 1 concept, then we are a step closer to making esports more mainstream.

If we concentrate on a game at a time then it will die eventually and then you start again on the ranking, the idea behind this one is that it can evolve with the way games are released and supported (or not) by big tournaments. Im not sure how a lot of the players feel about this, although most I discussed this with over the last few months liked the idea and viewed themselves as 1v1 players rather than a "pk" player or a "q3" player, so Id guess im not far off the beaten track here.

Lets see how the ranking changes over the course of the year and I am sure it will cause debate, which is all good.

<< Comment #104 @ 13:45 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Carmac - Reply to #87

Various FPS games is like tennis on clay, grass etc. Well... not quite but definitely closer than basketball and baseball players together :).

<< Comment #108 @ 13:55 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #104

Certainly the key elements remain the same on all FPS 1v1 games, timing, control, aim, prediction and strategy.

<< Comment #110 @ 14:04 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

fooKi - Reply to #104

Various FPS games is like tennis on clay, grass etc..

sure..

<< Comment #111 @ 14:06 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Carmac - Reply to #110

Closer to one another than basketball and baseball is the point. Hello?

<< Comment #114 @ 14:09 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

fooKi - Reply to #111

ah yea :)

HI

<< Comment #125 @ 14:44 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #114

lol

<< Comment #133 @ 15:39 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #16

"Another example of how flawed the league is the start comparing sportsman in tennis and football, you just cant do that."

YEAH, just like someone can win world events in fotball, tennis, hockey and baseball like fatal1ty then supposedly did in gaming? Gimmy a break with these sports/games comparisons that does not make any sense, it's way to "CPL dude on CPL forum"-like :\

<< Comment #214 @ 21:27 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

jonjay - Reply to #133

lol...ok.

<< Comment #215 @ 21:30 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #214

phew.. thx.

<< Comment #249 @ 19:35 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

jonjay - Reply to #215

You can make comparisons to sports because apparently gaming is a sport, an "e" sport :P

What you said in your post doesnt make any sense at all. ACTUALLY, wait it does make sense, you just proved what i meant in the first place, thanks.

No, no sportsman can win everything in different sports not even fatality hence he is not top of the league.

Whats your point btw?

Edited by jonjay at 19:37 GMT, 27th Jan 2006

<< Comment #252 @ 11:31 UTC, 28 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #249

"Gimmy a break with these sports/games comparisons that does not make any sense"

Fatal1ty has been on top in several games, noone has been on top in both tennis and fotball..

<< Comment #256 @ 15:00 UTC, 29 January 2006 >>

By

Carmac - Reply to #252

There have been talented all-round athletes in the past who won titles in hockey in the winter and then in soccer in the summer. And took part in athletics competitions as well. But that was a long time ago.

Today we have athletes competing in the long jump and running at several distances. Or Boudewijn Zenden who's a top footballer and won a gold medal for judo in the Dutch junior championships.

<< Comment #257 @ 15:32 UTC, 29 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #256

That's cool, didn't know that -- but i guess it still ain't comparable to fatal1tys "dominance" that remain disputed.

<< Comment #258 @ 15:51 UTC, 29 January 2006 >>

By

jonjay - Reply to #252

You still have made your point.

My point is: league is unfair because its taking into account different games. Cannot do that because all games are different and vary in tournaments.

Your point?

<< Comment #259 @ 15:57 UTC, 29 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #258

That sports comparisons are often fucked up in all ways.

<< Comment #227 @ 05:45 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

nekon - Reply to #16

tennis is 1v1, football is a team sport, and this ranking is about 1v1 fps games, so your example makes no fkn sense :[

<< Comment #248 @ 19:32 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

jonjay - Reply to #227

I was comparing tennis and football on the number of players they have in the game but the number of tournaments. Read what I said.

<< Comment #233 @ 11:59 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

Lethe - Reply to #14

wait, you mean that 12.8 players will lose a foothold in the ranking as it begins to update it self with this years events?

<< Comment #15 @ 07:25 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (212.0.77.121)

haha rofl =))) really nice rankings -- CZM on 23 its may be ok? - but zero4 on 66 =)) - and hamzik on 99 - they know him... haha
if hamzik on 99 without outrus champs, what about evil... look last demo on that site...

HAHA noobish ztraider 4 greatest deuller in the world... woooow hehe of course that qcons 2001,2003, wcg 2001, Cpl babbages, of zero4 - nothing for greates event of all times - CPL Chili...

hey who that Combat Carl he higher then czm on 1 step...

2%

<< Comment #18 @ 08:19 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Ztrider - Reply to #15

would [+] you if you had an account

Edited by Ztrider at 08:20 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

2%

<< Comment #41 @ 10:39 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

hnns - Reply to #18

personally I [+] comments, not users.

10%

<< Comment #45 @ 10:49 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Ztrider - Reply to #41

well yeah.. but theres no point in [+] an anonymous user is there ?

<< Comment #82 @ 12:25 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Carillo - Reply to #45

Sometimes people are too busy or simply too lazy to login. Or login from different computers and don't remember their password for 3 years (which happened to me). To me it makes sense to plus even anonymous comments, if they're worth anything. Now be a good boy and plus Mr. Anonymous! ;)

<< Comment #135 @ 15:46 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #45

No point or the whole point?

If everyone used the + system properly you would be able to scroll through a thread shitfast, only reading the +related posts and still get the main or proper, rather, idea of the thread faster and better than normally. Ofc you can argue that someone has to make the plusses in the first place, but that's the first guys that post anyways, so it all makes sense! yay.

However, on the other hand, plussing the user would merly indicate how popular a user is when you check his profile -- which is certianly, at least for me, of less value than the aforementioned.

6%

<< Comment #138 @ 15:51 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Ztrider - Reply to #135

käften jävla norsk

2%

<< Comment #151 @ 16:30 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #138

jävla egd jävla svenska :)

<< Comment #153 @ 16:38 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

hnns - Reply to #45

why shouldn't they? In fact i'd value plussed anonymous posts more than others, since they're not the result of possible bias.

18%

<< Comment #181 @ 18:16 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #153

another argument +:)

<< Comment #228 @ 05:46 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

nekon - Reply to #15

well i heard that the best guy in darts isn't #1 in the global list, cause he doesn't attend as much tourneys as the guy in #1. so i guess this is the same here. you can have the greatest skill in the world, if you don't play, you don't get a good rank!

<< Comment #20 @ 08:43 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (212.0.77.134)

hehe ztrider go to win eurocup superior dueller... im havent something versus you, but we all knowing that you dont 4 dueller in the world - and when you agree with that stupid ranking and nothing facts like that... its seems very foolish...

Pk - was the ablsoulutly ideal duel game... looking for match voo fox - may be godlike king on GGL ranking will be showing his amazing skill...

<< Comment #23 @ 08:58 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Gladius - Reply to #20

testify!

<< Comment #25 @ 09:16 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Ztrider - Reply to #20

Eurocup dont mean shit since its online, I think I already proven to be a top dueler both in PK and Q4 placing top5 at CPL Winter

*Edit* And I never said that this ranking was BS or anything like that.. And your argument about Zero4 being the best dueler blab lablbalbl he havent proven anything since 2003 afaik, nothing in more then 2 years, shouldnt even be in a list like this then... doesnt matter how great you once we're

Edited by Ztrider at 09:18 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #27 @ 09:38 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

sphinx - Reply to #25

tbh eurocup is still considered one of the most prestigious tournaments to win throughout the years, dont have the idea being a good dueler means being a good lanplayer only

astz is a good dueler imo, shouldnt be on the list, but if you only look at his lan achievements you cant even see near where he's supposed to be. Same for luxxiz for instance, considered one of the biggest UT duelers atm, still he skipped eswc (with a good reason imo) that doesnt mean he should drop on a list like this. (not that either of these 2 players would be in the top10 atm ofcourse, but just if you talk about how to rank people)

Edited by Sphinx at 09:40 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #31 @ 09:45 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (c-24-126-67-98.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) - Reply to #27

"dont have the idea being a good dueler means being a good lanplayer only"

sorry ztriders got the right idea

<< Comment #36 @ 10:24 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Ztrider - Reply to #27

A good lanplayer is a the BETTER dueler, more pressure on lan, even ping and everything is more fair and harder...
Sorry but a good lan player > Online hero any day

And LAN achievements speaks for how good you are, not online results in small tournaments...

<< Comment #44 @ 10:49 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

sphinx - Reply to #36

hey i know its a big mindgame and on lan its more about being able to control your nerves etc. and i never said online players are superior, im just saying it shouldnt be counted out. but theres obviously some players that show superior ingame skills but still dont manage on lan because they miss the x-factor?

either way, only thing i meant was to say that the eurocup still holds it prestige throughout the years, AND its got lanfinals. and also still being a good dueler doesnt mean being a good lanplayer -theres a lot of good duelers that underachieve on lan, and the other way around-. But being a good lanplayer gets you in the ranks ofcourse, and its obvious why.

eurocup doesnt mean shit, thats just a kick in the shins :'(

hey no offense you are a great player and i really vouched for you through the WT, but being the top 4 duel player of all times sounds kinda weird to me considering the legends that are way lower on the list. So i have the feeling its all about money, and old glory gets forgotten easily.

Edited by Sphinx at 10:51 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #47 @ 10:49 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Ztrider - Reply to #44

yes I agree

<< Comment #137 @ 15:49 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #44

"4 duel player of all times"

All times? Did I or you miss something here?

<< Comment #193 @ 18:47 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (c-24-126-67-98.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) - Reply to #44

"eurocup doesnt mean shit, thats just a kick in the shins"

the truth hurts?

<< Comment #210 @ 21:15 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

sphinx - Reply to #193

how can it be the truth? please explain to me how a tournament where clans actually skipped lanfinals WITH moneyprizes to play the online finals without prizemoney for in the past has lost its prestige? (mtw for instance skipped some money tournament to win the EC where they won nothing but honor)

its still the same topplayers competing, lanfinals are back, the coverage is great, it runs over a longer time than just a few days so players have to be more consistent and active in their play instead of just focussing on practising before an event. And still you try to tell me it lost its prestige?

<< Comment #221 @ 00:25 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

Vo0 - Reply to #210

It did lose it's prestige. In fact, internet tournaments are just not as important as they used to be. Alot of the EC players will actually agree with this. But it's a really nice tournament for the spectator, the admins are doing a great job adminning it all, writing reports etc. And also let's not forget the shoutcasters, this is a nice coverage cup.

<< Comment #229 @ 07:00 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

sphinx - Reply to #221

really too bad then :'(

<< Comment #29 @ 09:39 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (212.0.77.136) - Reply to #25

you are wrong about zero4 - 2nd places on Eswc in 2003, cyberxgaming, qcon2004, after cooller and czm... http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=882577

doesnt matter how great you once we're - you idiot...

I think I already proven to be a top dueler both in PK and Q4 placing top5 at CPL Winter - ok... good luck but its not so easy like you thinking...

P.S. -World didn't have cybersport before PK...

<< Comment #34 @ 10:20 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Ztrider - Reply to #29

I know its not easy, and I never said its easy, but you keep saying how noob I am... but I guess top5 at CPL Winter is a noobish result :S

<< Comment #46 @ 10:49 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

aRa - Reply to #34

u shudnt defend urself against anonymous spammers. its just a waste of energy and time imo

<< Comment #48 @ 10:54 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

sphinx - Reply to #46

true that, these kind of ranking things are just pure flamebait (and i catch it myself too) because nobody will ever agree on a ranking, and it simply isnt possible to give a proper one. Hope soon it will flood with russian comments about polos, because how can he not be on the list while he did so well in the greatest gamer of all times polls!! *cough*

<< Comment #67 @ 11:41 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Ztrider - Reply to #46

its fun ;) hes prolly russian as well :)

<< Comment #177 @ 18:04 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

hemostick - Reply to #67

Yeah, both tracert+english seem to point that way :)

<< Comment #64 @ 11:35 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Lauke - Reply to #25

stop, wasting time, on, total, random, retards, who can't sleep at night anymore, because of a, totally-random-very-subjective-just4fun ranking. mate.

Edited by Lauke at 11:35 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #68 @ 11:41 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Ztrider - Reply to #64

I can't sleep at night =/

<< Comment #88 @ 12:39 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

civ - Reply to #68

ztrider!! ur good! now go to sleep every night knowing that! -...........................

<< Comment #90 @ 12:43 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Ztrider - Reply to #88

lol okay !

<< Comment #95 @ 13:05 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

jonte - Reply to #64

where did you learn to type like that, scoops columns?

18%

<< Comment #105 @ 13:48 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Carmac - Reply to #64

It's neither totally random nor totally subjective... Though totally for fun.

<< Comment #171 @ 17:51 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

oda - Reply to #105

Not totally for fun either. I'm sure there is meant to be something educational about this :S

<< Comment #173 @ 17:51 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Carmac - Reply to #171

I don't think fun excludes learning.

<< Comment #178 @ 18:06 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

oda - Reply to #173

You should be in politics with that kind of optimism.

<< Comment #179 @ 18:07 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Carmac - Reply to #178

You should know politicians are cynics, not optimists.

<< Comment #185 @ 18:23 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

oda - Reply to #179

The vast majority are cynics, true.

<< Comment #219 @ 23:14 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Lauke - Reply to #105

Ok I was clearly overreacting badly. Point is, don't take it too seriously :).

Edited by Lauke at 23:15 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #235 @ 14:34 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

Smiths0wnedian - Reply to #105

learn the meaning of the word total then idiot

<< Comment #243 @ 18:25 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

Carmac - Reply to #235

What about the meaning of total?

<< Comment #250 @ 20:03 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

Smiths0wnedian - Reply to #243

if my pockets are totally red then they can't also be totally blue, english motherfucker - you don't speak it

<< Comment #251 @ 20:05 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

Carmac - Reply to #250

Missed example. Red and blue are mutually exclusive. Just because a teddy bear is totally brown does not mean it cannot be cuddly too.

<< Comment #66 @ 11:39 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

sharakin - Reply to #25

ZeRo4 is the best dueler ever. RECOGNIZE BIATCH! ;Z

<< Comment #21 @ 08:55 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

JonBlom

Well done Redeye. Much appreciated.

<< Comment #22 @ 08:56 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (212.0.77.126)

showing his amazing skill vs one of quake3lames...i meant

<< Comment #24 @ 09:16 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (c-24-126-67-98.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)

this confirms the cpls dominance
i cant complain

<< Comment #26 @ 09:34 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

sphinx

think that lauke should be placed higher imo, he's been achieving very well in UT dueling since 2000/2001, think he is more steady than all the PK players. But i get only the money gets counted.

and ofcourse they only counted his ut2004 achievements, because he would be on the list way higher if it was for UT and ut2k3 too ofcourse.

Edited by Sphinx at 10:57 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #53 @ 11:05 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #26

no, its not just about money. Luake had 4 tournaments, others had anything up to 11.

<< Comment #57 @ 11:18 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

sphinx - Reply to #53

Then if you only rank over the last 12 months i'd give it another name than the #1 dueler or something because the newsitem makes it feel like its an alltime ranking, which i would strongly disagree on if it was. (would be missing destrukt or gitzZz then for instance ;x)

considering its the last 12 months i cant disagree i guess.

also maybe just a stupid question, i get its fps-based. but wouldnt sc or wc3 count as a gamingduel? :]

Edited by Sphinx at 11:21 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #59 @ 11:22 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #57

I didnt post this news, so not sure what u mean, but to clear it up (its very clear on the page) that this is a 12 month rolling ranking and will be produced each month.

As for a working title, I didnt suggest the "the redeye report" I actually called this a "1v1 FPS World Ranking". Which I think sums it up far better.

<< Comment #70 @ 11:46 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

sphinx - Reply to #59

sorry for my sloppy reading on that matter then :]

<< Comment #139 @ 15:53 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #70

Yes.

<< Comment #28 @ 09:38 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

rzr

isnt jibo russian :o

because it says he is chinese <:)

<< Comment #30 @ 09:41 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

sphinx - Reply to #28

he is chinese, lives in russia?

<< Comment #32 @ 09:53 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

brz - Reply to #28

chussian

<< Comment #35 @ 10:22 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (proxy-mail.auxigem.fr)

HAHA :D

<< Comment #37 @ 10:25 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

xou

Asif someone would still care about PK today. This ranking is more about $$$ than anything else. Boring.

<< Comment #38 @ 10:33 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

svr - Reply to #37

money makes the world go round

<< Comment #54 @ 11:06 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #37

Its not about money its about ranking players over a 12 month period. Hence, it will still show peoples achievements over the last 12 months...

<< Comment #39 @ 10:34 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

deotrip

dont like the ranking

<< Comment #49 @ 10:58 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

slfjsiadfjsioa

thanks for the bs

<< Comment #50 @ 10:58 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Roccket

Good idea, but it would be nice to have a list of the tournaments used to make this ranking, and the rank each one of them received.

<< Comment #55 @ 11:11 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #50

Thats a good point and something I will talk to GGL about putting in next months ranking.

For now, here is a list of all tournaments used in the ranking. (remember only LAN tournaments are being counted atm).

1 ECG UT2004
2 CPL WT - Turkey
3 CPL WT - Spain
4 Vsports Allstars Q3
5 Vsports Allstars PK
6 Vsports Allstars UT2004
7 CPL WT - Brazil
8 CPL WT - Sweden
9 CPL WT - Summer Dallas
10 ESWC Q3
11 ESWC UT2004
12 Quakecon Q2
13 Quakecon D3
14 CPL WT - UK
15 CPL WT - Singapore
16 Digital Life UT2004
17 CPL WT - Italy
18 CPL WT - Chile
19 CPL WT - Finals
20 Dreamhack Q4 VIA challenge
21 Asus Winter Q4
22 Cyber Blizzard 2005
23 ZA Lan2k Q4
24 CPL Winter 2005
25 Rendezvous Sweden Q4
26 ESRi VIA UK Invite
27 Everlan Winter 06

14%

<< Comment #140 @ 15:55 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #55

..and their respective value plz

btw, great job +:)

<< Comment #163 @ 17:19 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Roccket - Reply to #55

Thanks Redeye :)

<< Comment #175 @ 17:54 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

oda - Reply to #55

Nice one. I was going to ask about the value of certain tournaments.

Is there any points given to a player if he beats someone much higher on the ladder? (aside from the tournament points)

<< Comment #182 @ 18:17 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #175

Thats more of an ELO ranking and something we are also developing to run alongside this set of rankings in future months.

<< Comment #213 @ 21:21 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

mrobrien - Reply to #182

good, I was going to suggest using ELO... prize winnings != skill, results in individual matchups = skill... much harder to keep track of though of course.

<< Comment #51 @ 10:58 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

swy

this is bs =)

<< Comment #56 @ 11:11 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #51

You could try explaning why... good job i put more effort into this than you did your reply.

Edited by iTG`ReDeYe at 11:12 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #69 @ 11:43 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

swy - Reply to #56

Unlike you I'm have other things to attend to instead of being bored and making stuff like this.

Ok, that might've been harsh, so I'll try to tell you what I think about this:

Why would you compare different games in one ladder? It's like combining an NBA league with NFL
More leagues blabla you get the picture of that. Already explained here btw.

And lets be honest here, does anyone actually care who's on this list? Somekind of merged ladder with every player on it seems a bit far fetched to me. The money ladder was good, it's cool and simple. This is complex, random, uninteresting and tbh ( think about it) its a bit bs?

so my conclusion, you need to put in a lot of effort for something that just isn't worth it.

good thing you tried tho.

<< Comment #71 @ 11:49 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

InFeRn0^ - Reply to #69

happends all the time best sportsman of the year award anyone?

<< Comment #74 @ 11:56 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

swy - Reply to #71

that doesn't make it any less complex or uninteresting.

<< Comment #76 @ 12:09 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

InFeRn0^ - Reply to #74

dunno

<< Comment #85 @ 12:34 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #69

Ok you make a valid point and here is the answer. Part of my role (as I see it) as a media person covering esports is to make it more mainstream friendly. That doesnt mean change the games played or influence people to like it, just make it more understandable.

As part of that idea I developed this multi gaming 1v1 ranking because I viewed 1v1 players as a kind of breed of players, regardless of game played. For instance, last year PK was the world tour game, this year its Q4 and next year it might be something else (1v1 related) and the players seem to move on to the "next" game nowadays, where as in the past they may have stayed in one game they liked more. Im generalising I know, however stay with me. How I see 1v1 players is not as Quake players or UT players or PK players etc, its more that I see them as 1v1 duellers regardless of game, which then led on to this work being carried out across all games 1v1 FPS.

You use the analogy of basketball and baseball ranked together, however the way I see this ranking is more that they are all tennis players (1v1 FPS duellers) its just the surface (the game) that changes, but they are still ranked accordingly throughout a year of tennis (1v1 duelling). If we can get mainstream to understand the whole 1 versus 1 concept, then we are a step closer to making esports more mainstream.

If we concentrate on a game at a time then it will die eventually and then you start again on the ranking, the idea behind this one is that it can evolve with the way games are released and supported (or not) by big tournaments. Im not sure how a lot of the players feel about this, although most I discussed this with over the last few months liked the idea and viewed themselves as 1v1 players rather than a "pk" player or a "q3" player, so Id guess im not far off the beaten track here.

Lets see how the ranking changes over the course of the year and I am sure it will cause debate, which is all good.

oh and btw, I wasnt bored, this is the work of several months of investigation of ranking systems, mathematics and research of gamers, tournaments and systems used in other sports. This happens also to be my job (although only loosely based on broadcasting).

Edited by iTG`ReDeYe at 12:35 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

3%

<< Comment #89 @ 12:41 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

InFeRn0^ - Reply to #85

jamerioized

<< Comment #97 @ 13:19 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

impulseBE - Reply to #85

please don't hate gunk now for his answer... :(
i think it's a good idea

<< Comment #98 @ 13:32 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

swy - Reply to #85

Don't get me wrong here, I think its great that you do things for the community. Same goal of GUNK in the benelux.
But based on the effectiveness to reach out to the mainstream, a ladder based on a pro-gamers earnings will do exactly the same thing.

This idea doesn't do more than that, except for the fact you're going to and have been spending a shitload amount of time in it.

Which I think is just not worth it.

<< Comment #99 @ 13:36 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #98

<< Comment #122 @ 14:37 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

zarkof - Reply to #85

If any 1v1 FPS game could be grouped together sport-wise in a "1v1 FPS" family simply because they are similar in a way (FPS), I believe you could also group together sports or activities that are also similar in the same way.

You could easily derive to groups such as "card family" (poker, tarot, bridge, ...), "board family" (chess, draughts, go, ...), "ball family" (american football, rugby, football, basketball, handball, ...), "racket family" (tennis, badminton, table tennis, ...), "human course family" (100m, 200m, marathon, ...), "motorized course family" (F1, rally, moto, ...), or "combat family" (Karate, Judo, boxing, ...) just as you did with "FPS 1v1 family" (q4, pk, ut, ...)

While it may possibly be more understandable for the meanstream to name an overall champion in one of those families, wouldn't it also bring somehow a misconception of esport, an illusion or perhaps a decoy to what we have tried to "teach" people since the beginning?

Everybody here clearly understand that you cannot really sportively compare Cooller with Fatal1ty or Boxer with Grubby. So would it really be a good idea to tell the mainstream that they actually *can* compare them ??? that the oh-so competitive games we are playing are at the end so similar that you can "easily" compare a champion from one with a champion from another, even if they never really met before??

What would you think if we told you that Jordan was a better player than Ronaldinho? I honestly don't even know how you could find an explanation or a demonstration that could conclude to such statement, but unfortunately that's exactly the message you are delivering with this kind of ranking.

I really understand the issue with video games changing/evolving year after year. I simply do not believe that mixing games that way is the solution.

Just my 2 cents.

<< Comment #124 @ 14:43 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #122

I see youre point but again you attach likeness to different sports and thats not really where I am coming from. Could someone, using the ATP Tennis rankings compare a player who only plays on clay against someone who only plays on grass? answer, yes he can, its not entirely the same, but the same techniques are used (all be it in a slightly different way) and its still after all, tennis.

That is my whole argument here, I believe that all 1v1 players have the same basic understanding of how a 1v1 duel works, timing, control, aim, prediction and strategy. In a game like D3, the strategy might play a bigger role than say a game like PK where its fast and furious as opposed to slower paced. Much in the same way as clay is better for some players than others in tennis, but its still tennis.

Im not comparing (in my mind) different sports here, Im comparing esports 1v1 players that just happen to play on different surfaces (games).

<< Comment #164 @ 17:36 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Carillo - Reply to #124

That analogy to tennis is pretty good, I liked that. I'm picturing in the horizon the next big task to get e-gaming go mainstream is start promoting the hot female duellers as well as have these nerdboys add some muscle on them so they can follow through the natural careerspan of any mainstream athelete and become models for advertising everything from mousepads to Viagra and from men's underwear to motorcycles! ^^

<< Comment #220 @ 00:12 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

GHOST19 - Reply to #124

All tennis players play on all surfaces even if they have a prefered one. This ranking is obviously wrong, cooller, arguably the best gamer atm who won all the major events he attended is only sixth behind players who didn't win anything.
The PK world tour probably fucked up the whole thing with its numerous stops and $ in cash prize.
2006 should reflect better the quality of the players with one main 1v1 game : Q4.

The ATP system works with tennis but definitely not for the 2005 1v1 esport players

<< Comment #247 @ 19:21 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

ini - Reply to #220

Not all Tennis players play on all surfaces actually.

<< Comment #129 @ 15:17 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Carmac - Reply to #122

The ranking rates achievement - not skill. The thing with basketball and tennis or any other sport is that the tournaments and leagues there are organised in a completely different way so you cannot compare them at all.

Gaming tournaments are very much comparable because they all have basically the same ideas and structure behind them. What is more, those players all mingle with one another in different games. So you can have a player who started the season as a UT2004 player, got some success in PK and switched to Quake 4 like everyone else.

So from that point of view, when players switch over to different games, the ranking is doing a great job imo.

2%

<< Comment #100 @ 13:38 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

slfjsiadfjsioa - Reply to #69

yeah, pro-gaming is stupid

<< Comment #144 @ 16:05 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #69

It's a pity you can't see the advantage of this ranking; i'm just posting to let you know that others do. I think all of the best players and even the best of players ranked lower than they "should", would agree that this is one of the best ways to do this and that it is almost as fair as can be to what it is measuring. But now i'm already perhaps back to the fact that you don't see the use in what it is measuring ;)

<< Comment #191 @ 18:41 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

swy - Reply to #144

Is that a comment on me? Because if so, you didn't see my point.

please read comment #98 thanks.

<< Comment #194 @ 18:51 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #191

I saw your point; you think it does not represent anything remotely usefull by saying he should not have bothered, while i think he should've, because it's a great feature many people will enjoy.

<< Comment #196 @ 18:59 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

swy - Reply to #194

I hope so too, for the work he put in it.

5%

<< Comment #199 @ 19:16 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #196

:)

<< Comment #58 @ 11:19 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Vo0

Cry many rivers, all!

<< Comment #102 @ 13:39 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

TosspoT - Reply to #58

I'm coming for your first place...

<< Comment #107 @ 13:53 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Ztrider - Reply to #58

Cry more noob!

<< Comment #60 @ 11:23 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

miya

Where is Gitzzz in teh rankings?

<< Comment #62 @ 11:26 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #60

Its a rolling 12 month ranking (ATP Tennis style) not a "who is the greatest gamer" ranking.

<< Comment #63 @ 11:28 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

miya - Reply to #62

Then why is Zero4 in? Did he play any competitions recently?

<< Comment #65 @ 11:35 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #63

Vsports Allstars at E3.

<< Comment #73 @ 11:54 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

miya - Reply to #65

Must have missed that one. Did he perform well ?

<< Comment #197 @ 19:06 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Gladius - Reply to #73

no, I think he lost all his games.

<< Comment #61 @ 11:25 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe

I know of a tournament that should be included, what do I do?

Simply email [email protected] with the following details.

* Full name of the tournament
* Location, country, city.
* Full break down of prize money, including how much for 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc
* Date it took place
* The top 16 finishers in order, including Game Name used, Real name, country of birth and clan tag/name. (we may ask for the top 64 if seeded highly) OR a URL link to these items.
* The full URL to the results.

The tournament will then be awarded a seed from the ranking panel and placed in the following months ranking list, unless it fails to meet the ranking criteria. (see : An Overview).

<< Comment #77 @ 12:10 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

suiii

Its interesting that only the insecure duellers on that list who are scared of getting found out find the need to get into flame wars to defend themselfs. Great players do their talking in game. I think alot of PK players will be found out in the coming months.

<< Comment #83 @ 12:30 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

von

Nice job ReDeye!

I completley agree that one ranking for FPS games are enough, and that it shoud be based on performances in tournaments. The bigger the tournament, the more points awarded for high placement.

<< Comment #86 @ 12:35 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

sphinx - Reply to #83

"I completley agree that one ranking for FPS games are enough"

euuuh? :O

<< Comment #84 @ 12:33 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

lab

fnatic did nice job !

<< Comment #91 @ 12:45 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Godsmurf

Good idea to combine all the games imo, and the prize money is a good way to weigh the importance of the games. You could still make side rankings per game though, then everyone's happy.

<< Comment #93 @ 13:03 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

TUMULT

Fat second in dueler ranking? If Carmac was doing this ranking I would not say anything.. but wtf wrong error whats matter?! etc

<< Comment #96 @ 13:06 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Gladius

nice job redeye!

btw, akiles in All*? Do they still even exist? (akiles was in d&m some time ago)

Edited by .:CyraX:. at 13:09 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #154 @ 16:39 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

spyteman - Reply to #96

I guess that's not clan Allstars from Sweden, but some Spain clan as I remember a few 'younger' players in Q3 from that area were wearing this clantag, too.

<< Comment #106 @ 13:52 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Carmac

I think I will start nuking the comments of those who didn't even bother to read the fucking news item. Just for the sake of the dumbasses that post them.

5%

<< Comment #152 @ 16:32 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

JonBlom - Reply to #106

Best idea I've heard today. Go ahead carcar, you can do it!

<< Comment #109 @ 13:56 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Lethe

what has toxic won? i mean, to be on the list?

<< Comment #112 @ 14:07 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Carmac - Reply to #109

nothink.

18%

<< Comment #116 @ 14:16 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ini

Amazing how many people don't get the simple concept of this.

<< Comment #119 @ 14:21 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

rzr

amazing how many complain about it. Red eye put a lot of work in this and all what stupid people do is complain. STFU all!

oh and btw.. newsguy its Vo0 NOT VO0 It looks ugly ass hell!

Edited by rzr at 14:23 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #132 @ 15:35 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

RaZa - Reply to #119

dude ..

$newsTitle = strtoupper($newsTitle);

:(

<< Comment #141 @ 15:57 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Nicky - Reply to #119

the news title is in capitals , if u look over -> there it shows it correctly

<< Comment #155 @ 16:40 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

rzr - Reply to #119

ok ty

<< Comment #123 @ 14:43 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

plaZmaa

Great writeup redeye, so this is what you were doing the other day :D

<< Comment #126 @ 14:47 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

focuz

why didnt u use the names I have u? :D

<< Comment #128 @ 15:11 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Corpsegrinder

Luxembourg 4tw. oh,fps only :(

<< Comment #134 @ 15:39 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

a1r-r41d

this is very bad!!!
ztrider is online hero!! i always lost on him!! THIS IS BAD!!!!!!!
i fuck him on the lan pink!!

<< Comment #136 @ 15:47 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Loop?

I think it's bs to downgrade all the pk players. I'm curious how that ranking will look like in 6 months. I don't think that all pk players will be out of it. I'm pretty sure we will see fat,voo,ztrider,lexer in at least top 15. And if zyz and stelam practice seriously they will probably too. Though I've got my doubts on the practice thingy because there's not much I've seen from them in Q4 so far :/

7%

<< Comment #147 @ 16:17 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #136

Yeah, many people who wanted to give progaming a shot was playing pk last year to test it out. It was and is an indication of the players actually trying to get somewhere, not just rape it up with their veteran skill. E.g you have Forrest, Aim, Garpy, Wombat and rat; all very skilled players in their own right, who did not "own it up" in the WT, but still gave it a good shot. I'm sure we will see those players and more breathing the q3 legends "headstarters" in the neck moreso than random q3 people randomly picking up q4 at exactly this point in time. Let it be so! :)

Edited by CPLains at 16:18 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #146 @ 16:13 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Tunnis

"You use the analogy of basketball and baseball ranked together, however the way I see this ranking is more that they are all tennis players (1v1 FPS duellers) its just the surface (the game) that changes, but they are still ranked accordingly throughout a year of tennis (1v1 duelling). If we can get mainstream to understand the whole 1 versus 1 concept, then we are a step closer to making esports more mainstream."

"Could someone, using the ATP Tennis rankings compare a player who only plays on clay against someone who only plays on grass? answer, yes he can, its not entirely the same, but the same techniques are used (all be it in a slightly different way) and its still after all, tennis."

Your tennis analogy is flawed in many ways. In reality there are no tennis players who only play on 1 surface. A player can have a strong surface but all players move along as the season goes. All good players compete in the 4 slams, which are played on 4 different surfaces. On top of that all tennis players can encounter each other in every tournament they play. You don't see Vo0 competing in ut2k4 tourneys, or Lauke in PK tourneys.

Saying that a different surface is a different game is also bs tbh. In tennis the basic ruleset + physics stay exactly the same only the surface changes. In 1v1 gaming only the very basic ruleset stays the same; i win if i have more frags than you in a given timeframe. The 'rules' of each game however and the game physics change so much that you couldn't call it tennis anymore in your analogy.

Would Roger Federer beat me with tennis (i've been playing it for 10 years now on a decent level) on a surface that he has NEVER played on and i have been practising on for two years? Offcourse he would.

Would Cooller/Vo0/Lauke beat me with FPS 1v1 (i've had my share) in a game that they have NEVER played before (and isn't like q3>q4, ut2k3>ut2k4) and i have been practising on for two years? Not very likely, to say the least.

If i would make the tennis analogy i would say that 1v1 FPS is a sports 'family' and that for example Q4=tennis, UT2k4=squash, PK=tabletennis, "random 1v1 FPS"=badminton.

The ATP system shows me who has got a good year in tennis and who not. It gives a good objective comparison of the atp tour players. This world dueller ranking tells me that Lauke has had a good ut2k4 year, Vo0 a good PK year, Cooller a good q3 year. But it does nothing for the comparison between players. How the hell can you compare the achievements of say Cooller to Laukes if they havent played against eachother and never even had the chance to face eachother?

The GGL World rankings is a gimmick, nothing more nothing less.

Edited by Tunnis at 16:13 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

15%

<< Comment #150 @ 16:26 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #146

"If i would make the tennis analogy i would say that 1v1 FPS is a sports 'family' and that for example Q4=tennis, UT2k4=squash, PK=tabletennis, "random 1v1 FPS"=badminton."

If tennis was out for practise in 2006, squash in 2004 and tabletennis in 2004, sure.. If only the newest game was filled with serious turnaments, sure. If the players had to play the newest game if they wanted to stay pro, sure.

And no, the games are not even that different.

<< Comment #157 @ 16:50 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Tunnis - Reply to #146

Not exactly sure what you are trying to say but I'm not the one starting the whole (flawed) tennis thing, but if i had to make that analogy i think mine is more accurate than ReDeYe's. Why rank something that is impossible to rank by nature?

Edited by Tunnis at 16:50 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #160 @ 17:06 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #157

I guess thats kinda the point. Its always been impossible to rank players of different games inthe past. This makes it possible. If you disagree however thats fine, you have your opinion but dont belittle it as nothing more than a gimmick after I spent so long on it. The challenge was, to rank players across different games, as something interesting to see every month. Is it perfect? hell no, its simply something else to consider when looking at 1v1 players.

<< Comment #168 @ 17:49 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

rzr - Reply to #146

omg i played tennis and badminton i must own!!!! :D

<< Comment #234 @ 13:43 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

zeicon - Reply to #146

well said

<< Comment #158 @ 16:51 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

baron Railgun

is OK with PK as a major dueling game when q-s have a bigger community (for ex) or NOT ?

speaking about money the response is affirmative
speaking about player's value also affirmative
speaking about number of players -negative

so PK has two major things not just one:
-big money prises
-big fps players involved (fat, zyz, stelam, lexer (?), etc)
uuuau! I think I forgot to mention voo! :)

I think that is correct if we say that PK was a major dueling game last year

<< Comment #161 @ 17:09 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #158

Thats not even the reason a lot of PK players appear so highly in this ranking. Its mainly to do with the amount of tourneys they all had compared to other games. This year it will change and come May or June the ranks will change a lot. Does that mean players who played PK will drop out of the ranking? no it doesnt, it just means they will drop lower unless they are still competing at lan events in Q4 or UT2004 this year. (or any other prize giving 1v1 lan for any other 1v1 FPS due out in 2006).

<< Comment #162 @ 17:17 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

baron Railgun - Reply to #161

hmmmm... where is money there are good players so these 2 are interconnected imo
else I could organise 200 far cry competitions this year with the prise of 100 $ for the winner still far cry would not become the major dueling game (maybe I'm exagerating a bit:)
so it's about the money first
yes it is!
:)

<< Comment #159 @ 16:56 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

skillzilla

vo0 is nothink on LAN

oh wait..

<< Comment #165 @ 17:44 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (59.182.6.248)

Really nice effort redeye:)lot of hgardwork put in all though i might disagree on many points

<< Comment #166 @ 17:45 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

lolilol

Nice idea, but if thresh was still playing q2 in 2005 he would be the 25th best dueller in the world.
And the "title" best dueller isnt correct since it depends a lot about the game, if it's all brain/aim/moves etc...
This kind of ranking is ok for cs, but for the 1o1 games it isn't. Imagine a ranking called the best "team" for every teamgames. Cs teams would be #1 since it has 10 times more events than any other team games.

Edited by lolilol at 17:56 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #169 @ 17:49 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #166

<< Comment #174 @ 17:53 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

lolilol - Reply to #169

Completed my comment ;)

<< Comment #170 @ 17:50 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Dodraugen

Was just going to ask where 2kr's name was, then I realized this list only covers the latest events

Nice list, you really put a loot of effort in it. I'm very pleased to se rmzs there (to bad he probably never will play anything but poker again =/). However, I was a bit suprised to see Chip Mask. I think he's an exellent player, but what has he competed in lately?

Oh, and btw, I would love to see a list of the "best all-time FPS-players" too.

Edited by Dodraugen at 17:53 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #222 @ 01:37 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

- Reply to #170

Chip was in last years ECG. Wonder where hes at now, was a disapointing to not see him invited for ESWC.

<< Comment #230 @ 07:24 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

Dodraugen - Reply to #222

Agreed. He probably didn't get invited because of inactivity, I don't see why he wouldn't be good enough for ESWC, at least in shape.

<< Comment #172 @ 17:51 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ninja51

:O

<< Comment #180 @ 18:12 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

slfjsiadfjsioa

shouldn't this be titled 'best dueler of the year'?

shouldn't this news have been deleted by now?

Edited by offo at 18:13 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #183 @ 18:23 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #180

I understood it would be ~1year ranking based on the headline, i don't see why people have so much truble, perhaps they got ul -_-

<< Comment #186 @ 18:26 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

slfjsiadfjsioa - Reply to #183

because it's the stupidist ranking ever, a player doesn't take up pk and he drops a zillion places. right, n1 pro-gaming, ggl, cpl.

saying it should be called 'best dueler of the year' is being nice, it should really be called 'best pk dueler'.

Edited by offo at 18:28 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #187 @ 18:31 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #186

There was only one WT in 2005, ul.

<< Comment #188 @ 18:33 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

slfjsiadfjsioa - Reply to #187

a WT consisting of how many events?

<< Comment #189 @ 18:38 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #188

My point was that their status decline as an up to date pro-gamer comes naturally when they don't follow the only game out there with a WT since they unluckily didn't enjoy it.

<< Comment #192 @ 18:43 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

slfjsiadfjsioa - Reply to #189

making pro-gaming and this ranking stupid.

<< Comment #195 @ 18:54 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #192

not everyone agrees..

<< Comment #203 @ 19:56 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

rzr - Reply to #195

u have to start with a ranking once.. if you start after q4 wt lot of q4 duellers will be in the list then people from <insert game> will complain that the list only consist of q4 players :I

<< Comment #236 @ 15:21 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

- Reply to #186

because it's the stupidist ranking ever, a player doesn't take up pk and he drops a zillion places. right, n1 pro-gaming, ggl, cpl.

[sarcasm] And where's Thresh on the list? I mean WTF? Just cause he has not competed since q2 does not mean he does not deserve to be ranked against todays active players, right? [/sarcasm]

Dude, its no different than rankings in other sports, like tennis. You are only as highly ranked as your past X performances over the last Y months. Jimmy Conners and Authur Ashe were great in their time, both #1 at some point, but are not even on the list today for CURRENT rankings. Why? Because they are no longer actively competing. They were great players, and would show up on any all-time greatest tennis players list, but on a current ranking list? I think not.

If the top players today did not play for a season, they should be ranked lower a year later. Many of the great q3 players chose not to compete in pk so their current rankings fell, giving way to those actively competing. If/when they begin to compete again in the current tourneys, and prove themselves by winning, they will again be ranked higher.

<< Comment #239 @ 16:37 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

slfjsiadfjsioa - Reply to #236

your stupid

<< Comment #240 @ 16:44 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

- Reply to #239

It's "You're", not "your". And you call me stupid.

<< Comment #241 @ 17:33 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

slfjsiadfjsioa - Reply to #240

there were a 100 more pk tourneys than q3, ut,q4 etc. so this is a fair rank? no, idiot.

tennis ranking is completely different because one year a tennis player isn't playing golf then ping pong the next. this is liking ranking all athletes in every sport.

Edited by offo at 17:52 GMT, 27th Jan 2006

<< Comment #244 @ 18:53 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

- Reply to #241

True, there is a mix of games ranked in that list but all the games are FPSs. The same basic skills are required. Aim, strats, movement, etc... that is all the same for any FPS ( UT, Quake, PK, ... whatever ). That is why the top players ( VoO and fatal1ty as examples ) dominate in more than one of them. They have a master of the basic skills that allow them to adjust to whatever FPS game/mod and excel at it.

To follow the tennis analogy, its similiar to playing on hardcourt vs. grass vs. clay. Playing on the different surfaces is very different and certain players excel on one while flounder on another, yet its all considered tennis. Hard courts are faster, balls can bounce funny on grass, your footing can be slippery on clay. Physics of the game are different, requiring slightly different strats and strengths, yet all is still considered tennis. The top tennis players are those who are able to adjust their gameplay for the different court surfaces and excel at it.

Same for golf. Different courses play to the strengths/weaknessess of certain players. Longer courses are better suited for players with a monster driver while tighter courses are better suited for finese players with a stronger short game. The top ranked golfers are those who excel at both skills.

So it not like ranking all the players in every sport in a single list, its ranking FPS players playing mutliple court or couse types. The best players are those who can best adapt to whatever FPS game/mod that they play.

<< Comment #245 @ 19:13 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

meat man - Reply to #236

Obviously a player not playing PK is going to drop rankings. You think the Q3 champion(a game with around 2 tournaments) should be ranked equal to the PK champion(a game with 10 tournaments, and A MILLION DOLLARS IN PRIZE MONEY)?!?!

No.

Not at all.

<< Comment #184 @ 18:23 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

-prodigy-

This ranking is just as pointless and flawed as all the other attempts - all these things ever do is stir up arguments and make people unhappy.

Why is there ALWAYS someone that has to do these things and try to pigeonhole the players ?

Can't they just be left to play their game without some arse trying to take control of it all and decide who's best ?

<< Comment #190 @ 18:41 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #184

lol

<< Comment #200 @ 19:29 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

TosspoT - Reply to #190

You sicken me redeye, you've taken control of poor Vo0's life, given him a tonne of money and put him at the top of the list! Shame on you!

<< Comment #202 @ 19:48 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Aaron - Reply to #184

you were the fat cave man that never explored the next valley

<< Comment #201 @ 19:44 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

tbone '

The amount of idiots on this site disgust me. Redeye you did a brilliant job and I'm sure in the few months it will be what everyone will be looking at to rank players.

47%

<< Comment #206 @ 20:33 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

TosspoT - Reply to #201

Seconded and plus'd!

<< Comment #208 @ 21:12 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #201

They are boringly critical and unreasonably negative indeed. +:)

<< Comment #204 @ 19:58 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Aaron

Very nice effort Paul, no easy task that's for sure, and a step in the right direction.

Unless a game like Counter-Strike or Starcraft is going to surface as a duel based game then players are always going to move from game to game where nessescary and when something like Quake 4 comes along and brings different backgrounds together then something like this is needed.

Another idea maybe would be creating as you say a Money list, creating a list for each game wouldn't be the way to go because after a short while they would become void.

Interesting stuff!

<< Comment #205 @ 20:28 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Carpio

Great Job ReDeYe! A money list would also be cool. Can you pls do it? :)

Edited by Carpio at 20:29 GMT, 26th Jan 2006

<< Comment #207 @ 21:06 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Carmac - Reply to #205

http://www.ggl.com/news.php?NewsId=1933

<< Comment #211 @ 21:16 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #207

teamgames got owned x)

<< Comment #212 @ 21:16 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

CLains - Reply to #211

WOW, nice observation CLAINS ++++++++++++

<< Comment #209 @ 21:14 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (p5493E49A.dip.t-dialin.net)

i dont see gitzzz on it, i dont think its correct but ok

<< Comment #216 @ 22:18 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

gSTRUCTOR :

Ontopic, we needed something like ReDeYe's ranking and im sure it will only improve in the future, gg, but...

Why so much hate towards PK players? Never played it but they are not responsible for the game selected by big $$$ tourneys. They had to learn the fucking game and (tops) did it well. Now they have to learn Q4 so lets WAIT and see how they do, you should be very happy with so much talented players focusing on Q4. Stop trying to see the future, all you anti-exPK-players whores are the real noobs that can only win a whining tourney, bitches!

<< Comment #217 @ 22:23 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

jester! - Reply to #216

Lot of Q3 elitism is all.

If its not a Quake game your already at a disadvantage if you play it, then it seems to go Q3 > Q1 > Q2...

<< Comment #224 @ 02:33 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

gSTRUCTOR : - Reply to #217

Quake elitism is killing the greatest hardcore multiplayer fps evah :<

<< Comment #226 @ 05:12 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

jester! - Reply to #224

?

CPMA?

<< Comment #218 @ 22:46 UTC, 26 January 2006 >>

By

meat man

85 \o/

<< Comment #223 @ 02:17 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

xero- '

i think redeye has done his job by creating some frenzy/hype for the up comming WT stops (more so than before...). You all fell for it! GJ Redeye. =)

<< Comment #225 @ 02:48 UTC, 27 January 2006 >>

By

Jonesy Inc.

I think it's a good idea. It's not like from game to game you're using your legs instead of your arms. We're all skilled at using a keyboard and mouse, and those kinds of skills transfer 100% from game to game. Additionally, most strategy is transferrable.

Maybe it's not perfect in it's current condition, but it is only a baby. It needs time to grow and mature.

8%

<< Comment #254 @ 14:24 UTC, 28 January 2006 >>

By

erthx

ahaaha the ranking is a joke..........

<< Comment #262 @ 17:14 UTC, 29 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #254

ahahahaha so are you :)

<< Comment #255 @ 14:30 UTC, 29 January 2006 >>

By

Fatal1ty isn't on top cause he isn't only a gamer anymore he is also a business man now.
As for Vo0 he is a student that quit school to be a full-time gamer now (correct me if im wrong) but that is what have heard.
This might be the reason why Vo0 is #1 & Fatal1ty #2 because Vo0 has played more lan tournemants than Fatal1ty cause he is busy with his business.

Edited by neobeatz at 14:55 GMT, 29th Jan 2006

<< Comment #261 @ 17:14 UTC, 29 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #255

In the ranking, they both played the same amount of tournaments.

<< Comment #268 @ 16:48 UTC, 30 January 2006 >>

By

erthx - Reply to #261

and you???

<< Comment #271 @ 18:18 UTC, 30 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #268

<< Comment #263 @ 19:55 UTC, 29 January 2006 >>

By

Domi/Daven

The ranking is similar in formula to the ATP Entry System, which is used in tennis as an objective, merit-based method used for determining qualification for entry and seeding in all tournaments.

>> I do not see how a ranking can be objective when it's made by a company that actually owns several leagues/ladders/tourneys.

<< Comment #264 @ 20:48 UTC, 29 January 2006 >>

By

Levi215 - Reply to #263

Ranking being Objective? Is a ranking not a collection of stats and stats can be interpreted in many ways however the stats themselves are just stats... Its the reader who provides the subjectivity.

<< Comment #265 @ 20:56 UTC, 29 January 2006 >>

By

Domi/Daven - Reply to #264

Various duel tournaments are ranked by our GGL evaluation panel from Rank 1 to Rank 12, based on a subjective evaluation of its prestige and top competitors in attendance

Which mean it's just as close to the ATP ranking (objective ranking) as infinity to 1

<< Comment #266 @ 22:52 UTC, 29 January 2006 >>

By

TosspoT - Reply to #265

Actually, if you think about it. Dont the ATP adminster tournaments? Or are somehow influencial in the tournaments! Maybe Tim Henman was world number 1 after all!

Edited by TosspoT at 22:55 GMT, 29th Jan 2006

<< Comment #269 @ 17:25 UTC, 30 January 2006 >>

By

Domi/Daven - Reply to #266

Yeah and elvis presley is still alive!

<< Comment #267 @ 23:03 UTC, 29 January 2006 >>

By

ReDeYe - Reply to #265

Edited by iTG`ReDeYe at 23:08 GMT, 29th Jan 2006

<< Comment #270 @ 17:26 UTC, 30 January 2006 >>

By

Domi/Daven - Reply to #267

Well it can be completely objective. I never said it couldn't be. I said it would surprise me, which is something else. If you say it's completely different, sure.
I don't see why you didn't release the ranking method together with that announcement though.

<< Comment #272 @ 20:12 UTC, 30 January 2006 >>

By

Carmac - Reply to #270

I do not see how a ranking can be objective when it's made by a company that actually owns several leagues/ladders/tourneys.

vs.

Well it can be completely objective. I never said it couldn't be.

Am I seeing things?

<< Comment #273 @ 16:44 UTC, 31 January 2006 >>

By

Domi/Daven - Reply to #272

It's a direct reply on it can be if it's made by him UPFRONT. They can still have asked for changes, but they wouldn't tell that anyway.

<< Comment #275 @ 02:48 UTC, 3 February 2006 >>

By

TosspoT - Reply to #273

Its a conspriacy!

<< Comment #274 @ 12:02 UTC, 1 February 2006 >>

By

Anonymous (a82-94-90-170.adsl.xs4all.nl)

vo0 is rulez