Right now in the Astral SitnGos there is a leaderboard for 1st 20 games played and best 20 , I think there should be a limit of 30 games for the best 20 this gives a player a chance to replace 10 bad games to improve their place on the Board. As of right now it is unlimited which means some can play 50 or even 60 games which others who don’t actually live on the site a chance to move up here, otherwise anyone who has the time to play 50+ games pretty much is guaranteed to take 1st place every week.This is an unfair disadvantage to all the other players . With a limit of 30 , at least this gives other players a chance to fight for this opportunity to move up on the LeaderBoard otherwise it comes down to quantity not quality of game play.
I remembered seven or eight years ago when a similar tactic was used to win and then owner Paul Gould created a formula that when you exceeded the units needed, you could play and lose points. The goal of the rule was to stop players who take over the game by lingering and playing, all to dominate over players with less time on hands. Let them linger if they want, but Replay Poker needs a new rule to deduct points.
wow , I agree with this , I spend time on replay but I am all for making it so that it is fair to all that loves the sitngoes, no matter how much time they spend on the site , it’s being fair to everyone that matters :))
I just looked up the rules and @Scratch there is a formula in place for such
“The low stake leaderboard sums up the tourney points earned in your first 120 sit’n’go tournaments during the month. After 120 tourneys we take your average score across ALL qualifying tourneys and multiply it by 120, which means after 120 tourneys your overall score can go down as well as up!”
Best of luck at the tables
The Goat
Yes @goat but that is for monthly only not for weekly
Interesting I had this conversation with @TiggyTime about a weekly b/c I said to her well “There must be a tie for 1st every week” I have won over 80 in a weekly promo before as has she … She told me they use the “Average” method to alleviate this and level the playing field … Guess need to do a bit of research b/c if this “Average” method is not in place then u are totally correct and it needs to be in place
The leaderboard is using the best 20 results in tournament points earned as a scoring type. It does not matter how many Astral League tournaments you play in one week, only the best 20 games will count towards your leaderboard rank… found on Astral SitnGo rules
It says nothing about using average score
I totally agree with the proposal offered here. People who have nothing better to do than to hang around for 18 hours a day and rack up unlimited amounts of games is unfair to the rest of us. 30 games to replace 10 bad games is a sensible solution to this problem. REPLAY, please implement this change!
Agreed…if the best 20 is decided with a lower range of games it makes sense for those competing for the ladder position as nothing have a upper limit on games played doesnt make it a fair contest for those who are scraping past playing 25-30 or 5 games per week vis a vis to players who can play over 50 games…some on the last day and last few hours are trying to play 4/5 in a row to try to win the leaderboard position.
This amounts to the fact that whichever player plays over 50 games is the best 20 winner as your odds of winning more games and getting podium finish is much higher…
the only down side is players actually who play 50/60 games still lose more in chips than actually gain…as if you count the amount of chips you buying in and do the math …even if you place first in 1st 20 and best 20 and take those chips against the chips you invested…you will be losing more than gaining…the only gain is bragging rights finishing on top…in hindsight there is no upside in terms of chip earning playing 60 games but does affect players who play half those games…
if the leaderboard supports those who play the most and not the win counts or podium finishes then the leaderboard is faulty…the best 20 should be in game ranges from 25 to 35 not the more one plays they win…its also saying ill throw more chips reduce my bank but win best 20…where is the sense in this?
Sharon is right. Why not use the same system they use for the monthlies?
yes it does make good sense .
i agree that a limit should come into play, i feel that is the reason that i dont even try this competition is knowing that you will be going up against people that camp out all day getting unlimited games to gain the ultimate prize, limits seems like a very good suggestion
This depends on who is playing … I must believe u are talking about an inferior player
I would like to hear from someone from replay staff to see what their thoughts on this are…shouldn’t games be fair for all who play ?
Good idea - and for my two cents, I think 30 is a good number (someone else might have mentioned that
first).
Not a specific example, but when you find yourself about 5,000 points out of first in “best 20” after your 26th game at the end of the week, and you’re behind a player that played 50 games - well, jeez.
DITTTTTTTTTO
Not every promotion is meant for every player, nor should they be. An operator must consider the overall health of the site and make sure enough games are going off and enough tables are being filled. At their root, all promotions are meant to generate increased volume of play. The 1st 20 leaderboard in the SnG lobby encourages players to get 20 games in, whereas they might only have played 15 games without a leaderboard. The “best 20” leaderboard caters to the players who can put in more volume by encouraging them to play ever more games.
While lower volume players might not be able to compete on unlimited game-based leaderboards, the increased volume of play benefits them in other ways. It increases the number of games that go off so people aren’t waiting forever for a SnG to fill. It also encourages players more willing to gamble to get that 1st place or nothing. These players increase the ROI of the grinders at the tables.
Look for leaderboards that suit your level of play, in terms of volume and abilities. Don’t worry about ones that don’t. If anything, look for ways that those other leaderboards impact the games you are playing. Try to figure out how to make that work for you. It’s a game of edges and incentives after all.
Thanks for nothing warlock
Sadly it often takes one player (or a very few) to tilt an otherwise good setup to one that is abused. While I don’t have a problem with the current Best 20 format, it would appear that some have decided to tilt that format to their advantage. I understand Replay has an interest in the quantity of games played, I would like to think they are also interested in the quality of games played.
Couldn’t this also be said for players to get 30 games in on the Best 20 ,most give up after 25 because they see players with 50+ and know they have no shot.