Oh, I see. I think that if you beat somebody that is ranked 100+ points below you, you should get 1 point for winning, and if they're less than 100 points below you, you should get 2 points for winning.

---

~Senshi Katana~

戦士カタナ

Yeah, but if somebody is at a lower level than their opponent, they can lose and still gain points depending on the difference between the players' points. I don't think this is fair, because the winner will lose points as well.

There's a reason why a highly ranked player will lose points if they battle against a player that's way beneath them in points: it's that way in order to encourage high-level players to battle against people with roughly the same skill level as them, instead of beating up on weaker players in an attempt to spam points.

Oh, well, that does make sense, but somebody could be a great blader with low points because they don't battle a lot. Having a lot of points means that you are succesful, but having low points doens't mean that you're any weaker IMO

---

~Senshi Katana~

戦士カタナ

If the player doesn't battle as often as they could, then they probably don't care about rankings. However, if they have a low point value because they just got started, and they're a skilled blader, then it shouldn't take them very long to work their way up in the rankings, provided they care enough to actually battle.

Actually, players might not battle because there is no-one for them to blade against. Things aren't always so cut and dry. Where I live, I know about 4 bladers. To blade them over and over again is basically point spamming. You see where I'm coming from?

---

~Senshi Katana~

戦士カタナ

I've been messing around on the ELO Calculator that Brad posted, and it turns out we were mistaken: if a player with a rating of 2500 (a master, pretty much) goes up against a person with a rating of 1500 (a new player, pretty much), neither player gets anything if the 2500-rated player wins. It's not possible for a higher-ranked player to lose points by winning, they just don't get anything out of it. However, since they still have nothing to gain by fighting opponents that are way below them, points-wise, then it forces them to fight people closer to their level.

Regarding your post, I have to ask: why would anyone sign up for the IBA if they don't actually plan on participating? And, in light of what I've learned on how the ELO system works, fighting the same 4 people over and over won't amount to point spamming. Even if you're drastically better than all of them, you will eventually just reach a point where you don't gain any points by playing against them.

You can plan on participating, but circumstances change

---

~Senshi Katana~

戦士カタナ

I'm confused now; what are we arguing about again? If I'm not mistaken, you argued that the Elo system was unfair because you thought higher ranked players could lose points to a player far below them in rankings, even if they won. It turns out that this isn't the case at all; the worst that could happen is that the higher-ranked player will reach a point where just won't get any points at all when they win.

It seems, though, that we've split off onto another argument regarding participation. I think that no matter what ranking system you use, you won't ever make it anywhere near the top if you can't or won't participate. That's just the way competition works. That still doesn't mean the Elo system is bad.

Uh, yeah. You don't lose points for beating someone weaker than you. There would have to be an extreme ranking difference to get 0 points for winning, as well. Since that was settled, I guess I don't need to talk about that anymore.

As for avoiding participation once your rank is high, well, not to mention the constant ridicule one would get for this, other Bladers' ranks would continue to rise while yours remained stagnant. You also wouldn't accumulate any more medals. We may look into penalization, as well.

Well, if that DoomPenguin says true, there is no good reason for a higher level player to play a lower level player. This could be a problem.

---

Well, if that DoomPenguin says true, there is no good reason for a higher level player to play a lower level player. This could be a problem.

If you want to win events, you have to battle whoever is there. Medals are important to your ranking as well as BP.

That sounds more balanced. Will BP boosts be award for tournament wins, or will medals just be the distinction?

---

The medals will be the awards. BP bonuses for tournament wins will make the system unbalanced.

will there be tournements in my country saudi arabia lol(i know the answer no need to tell me) i wish if i was living in usa or canada or uk in my country the only bladers are me and my sis lol

---

If you want tournaments there, you'll need to host them yourself. This project is reliant on the support of the community.

If you want tournaments there, you'll need to host them yourself. This project is reliant on the support of the community.

i tried to find any saudi blader on net but i cant , plz if anyone knows a saudi beyblade site or something just tell me cuz i wish to enter a tournement

---

[Image: ELO.jpg]
Doompenguin, this is what I meant. I'm not looking for an arguement though, just saying that this is the kinda thing that happened when I fiddled with the calculator.

Anyway, Brad says that medals will be used as well as points, so this isn't really anything major

---

~Senshi Katana~

戦士カタナ

^ It's because you didn't select a winner, and there won't be any draws in Beyblade.

Ohhh... sorry about that

---

~Senshi Katana~

戦士カタナ