Grinders Hall of Fame

[driven2sin]

This is the true *player* ranking list of all time - emphasis on playing, as it shows who really plays and grinds and plays and still wins at a high %

Scoring goes to the top 3 win totals each month in the top 13 ranked in % (other words, made the first page of ranking) 10pts for 1st, 6pts for 2nd, 3pts for 3rd
also, bonus points for reaching 100 wins in a month since that shows no regard for rank sitting

100 wins get 2 extra pts, 200 wins gets 5pts (only risky & Alex Dix) and the crazy Alex Dix gets 10 extra pts for his 300 win performance

Here is the top 40 with Rhox edging out mamith by getting two extra 100 win months to win and be the all time top Grinder by 2pts (only 67 accounts ranked)

[Rhox]

Didn't I win the #1 ELO spot of all time a couple years back? I may not be considered the best but I'm racking in these #1 accolades.

Also, who in the hell is QraqRhox and how did he make the list? That's definitely not me.

[Rys4k]

May 2011 -- 244 wins.

Cheers,
-Rys

[driven2sin]

Rhox, the list definitely shows the big time players since if they just played crappy players they would have had frozen scores and not get into the top 3 wins of the top 13 ranked for the month - no clue about QraQRhox. Anna2 and Weezy showed up later down the list.

And also, as Rys4k chimes in, just winning and losing a lot of games will not put you on this list much either. You still need to play well for the month.

When rank sitting became the trend, it was rare to see 100 win efforts in the top 13 %. It was very common in the old days when people played a lot more rather than rank sit.



I guess i will be clear on the scoring again... you only get points if you are in the top 3 win totals of the top 13 % for the month. If you won 500 games at rank 14 you get nothing. If you won 100 and was #1% ranked but 3 other players had more wins than you in the top 13%, you get nothing.

You get the bonus points for 100,200,300 wins only if you were a top 3 in wins of the top 13% for that month

That is why it is called the Grinder ranking. For those that still love to play a lot but still keep their % high each month. Who knew Fluffballs was such a grinder??? I don't think I ever played that person

[47]

D2S, I'll gladly play you heads-up in a thirty game series.

[Rhox]

I remember Fluffballs. He was good, quiet on the boards though.

[OncoByte]

There's more than one way to skin a cat.

Here's one:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2358

It take games played into account and penalizes rank sitting.

Don't be spooked by the math - it would live under the hood. All you need to know is how many games you played, how many you one, and how many games have been played that month on average.

[Rhox]

D2S, I'll gladly play you heads-up in a thirty game series.

Update on this. D2S and 47 have been playing each other all night. The Leaderboard shows 47 is ahead, seemingly by a lot, from what's visible at least.

[47]

My head hurts.

47: 19 wins
d2s: 11 wins

[driven2sin]

yeah 47 played sharp till the last game i started getting sloppy earlier but many of those games he had the answer regardless - he makes a big statement in the grinder column

I think only about 2 or 3 games I should of won that i lost so he definitely brought it in this marathon.. i guess 6 hours?

[driven2sin]

this board really is dead but a 30 game match deserves a little bit more commentary:

I stuck mainly to my preempt attack mode where I force a piece into opponent side early to use/get something disruptive for a divide and conquer playbook. This usually reduces the midgame and allows me to go from opening to endgame. Only 9 out of 30 games went this way. 47 was able to restrain, weather the storm, and be creative enough to get around my obstacles. But the key to his success was not to stay in the midgame too long since many times I had a second wave preparing.

He was able to close out in a variety of ways and allow pieces to get sacrificed to finish the job. Most players covet their pieces too much to have effective endgames.

Of those 9 I blew only one ending by letting a kami row take out 2 of my last 3 pieces. That was one of my 2 really bonehead mistakes.. we didn't have too much of that. I did have two epic comebacks from the dead and the last game 47 was falling asleep with a good lead and d/c for my last win.

in the first 20 games it was still 12-8. But in the last 10 I was making more mistakes as fatigue was setting in and in the others 47 was getting some nice double and triple quads to turn around any early leads I got.

I used to play MtG tournies that would go whole weekends, 12 hours each day, so long battles I usually see the other person start to make the mistakes.. 47 passed all the tests

[Rhox]

The best players have learned to detach themselves emotionally from their Torii. In other news, this board is dead.

[47]

Yes, as d2s said, I was leading in our very last match, but I literally fell asleep at my laptop and ran out of time. Embarrassing.

My analysis: I have always done well against d2s, which was one of the reasons for my challenge. I did about as well as I was expecting to. I don't think this because I'm "better" strictly speaking, but because of the way our styles match up. d2s makes the early attack, and I am able to survive it without wasting my best powers. Then when I counter attack, he has little to defend with. d2s does well in games that are wide open with orbs scattered all over the landscape. My brain usually gets swamped by combinatorial explosion in such games, so I did my best to prevent the games from opening up in that way (by refusing sacrifices, etc.). In any case, I do think d2s would match up better against many players than I do. Sanzo, who always crushes me, comes to mind.