Neo Ladder

[Kamuscha]

Just checked the ladder list, I agree that it got tiny compared to the last time I remember it.

Well at least there's some decent competition that remains and I hope that will suffice for the time being.

Game created for Abroxas. Pass is awbw

Good luck mate.

[Walker]

The games for Kamuscha and ichbinsehselber have been made.

The password for both is awbw.
Game names are "Ladder: ichbinsehselber vs. Walker" and "Ladder: Kamuscha vs. Walker".
Optionals banned for ichbinsehselber, unbanned for Kamuscha.

Good luck to you both!

[ichbinsehselber]

I resigned vs Kamuscha.
Good game, you played Max to the max.

[ichbinsehselber]

walkerboh has resigned in our game here:
http://awbw.amarriner.com/game.php?games_id=145656

I did not expect the game to be over already here. Anyway gg...

[Abroxas]

Abroxas resigns against Kamuscha.

http://awbw.amarriner.com/game.php?games_id=145260

Good game, though it was quite obvious who would win the big stalemate. I think I've learned a lot.

[blanci1]

resigned to fdkanns on a night of SCOP lessons ... see strategy forum topic "learn from blanci s spankings" !
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=13731&p=241159#p241159

well played fdk.


....

[ichbinsehselber]

I am so happy that I have reached rank 2 *dancing* a few weeks ago.

If a ladder admin is coming around can you please update the list? Thanks

[LadderAdmin]

Actually I think I'm going to close down the Neo Ladder for the time being. There are hardly any players remaining, and hardly any games still running (if any). You can continue to use this thread to find opponents to play against, but the front page will not be updated any further.

[blanci1]

Actually I think I'm going to close down the Neo Ladder for the time being. There are hardly any players remaining, and hardly any games still running (if any). You can continue to use this thread to find opponents to play against, but the front page will not be updated any further.

Well its pretty active near the top!
Just give the ladder password to some of the regular players .. (just like with the coloseum) and we can fix up the lead page ourselves as and when necessary. ((Anyone who tried anything would be soon found out and become the laughing stock!))

Ive just recently had my first ever games against fdkanns and Kamuscha .. these are top players and were it not for this ladder i might have never got to play them. I lost to fdkanns , though on the same day i beat him in the fog league, meanwhile Kam says i have a winning position against him. So the ladder is great as far as im concerned. I m just now getting experience against strong players... after being here years ! Joining the ladder is the only way anyone can get to play strong players in a reasonable timeframe.

We also have Ichbinselber who is getting better, and who has just expressed he is enjoying his rise. I ll be challenging him next! So we do have a pretty competitive bunch of 3 or 4 real contenders fighting for the top positions.

The top positions are under active contest.

I suppose total player numbers have got a bit low though... is this a problem though?

Perhaps we need some promotion and recruitment (like red11 did to get many players into his tourney )?
I think we could also raise some ideas about how to encourage people to join and continue in the ladder. At the moment people join, play a few games but if they dont win.. (probable if they are challenging higher players) they might feel theyve done all they can here... and drift away. I have a few of ideas, but an open debate and ideas from others would be good too.

[Walker]

It is my personal opinion that the Neo Ladder does not have much to offer compared to the Colosseum. To me the Colosseum is simply a better version of the ladder, and there aren't enough players around for both to thrive. Over the last year the Colosseum has done and the Neo Ladder kind of died off slowly but surely over the last 6-8 months.

Recruiting from among the non-forum goers is one option. I have recruited heavily for the Colosseum, but then I have also had issues with players dropping out or becoming inactive, and many players who are recruited still won't check the forum regularly. So it'd take a lot more administration, and I think that it is more of short-term cure than a long-term one.

I have enjoyed the ladder considerably, but don't see much point in continuing on with it myself now that there are only 4-5 people playing. If I wanted to have a game against one of you guys, I'd just make it a private game. So it's not like you can't ever get a game against Kam or fdkanns. And playing in the Colosseum and earning your way up is also always an option to get games against top players.

So in conclusion, I see nothing wrong with letting the ladder die, but there's probably nothing wrong with keeping it running if there are still 3-4 people interested in playing games on it...

[LadderAdmin]

Edit: I updated the standings one more time. Judging from how inactive it looks, I just assumed that there was no more real interest. If there is still interest in playing in the ladder by more than just blanci, I can continue to update it as needed.

[blanci1]

Thanks for update. (mainsite down again, so i may as well do this... )

Mmmmm....I guess there are few players, (though they are active recently).
Im away for a week, when i return, ill see if i can get some new people and more on ideas and how to promote it. Obviously if not, then on present course its gonna fade away.

In the meantime, i think we can identify some "reasonably" different criteria between ladder and coloseum formats: (of course, they may not be equally relevant to everyone) but we may list them in case: I think its a good thing they are different.

1. AET/boot is much longer for ladder. The coloseum time controls could be too short for some, EG. "weekend players" ( i often play midweek but only can "guarantee" time at weekends).

2. Surely one can in principle climb the ladder fast. Really, i got to play fdk and kam very soon once i joined in the ladder ...to get to play them in the coloseum will take for example, black-wave or kreugster (upcoming stars, ..he he) will take 4 or 5 seasons, well over a year. If he gets ill or takes a super-long holiday it might never happen.
In the ladder, a player can shoot up in weeks.( i think i might mention this fact to some of the newer guys with a lot of wins, they might be encouraged to join ladder)

3. The maps are different, and could be changed and be more different (!?).

4. There could be other differences, any ideas anyone?

Furthermore, I do think playing a "published/official" competition (with results, leaderboard/ranking, etc, shown in forum ) has some differences to playing friendly games..again this can be different from one person to another, but for some it can be significant. Some Differences:

1. Some people are going to play differently in such games. Particularly the leaders who have something to lose. In Friendly games, one might experiment and take excessive risk, or play rather too quickly or be overly defensive or use some other non-ideal style.

2. Some top or experienced players have organised how many games they want to play and are not always open to offers of games.. perhaps just due to time. Also many (not all!) less experienced players can be shy about challenging such players, who are likely busy and you may not want to pester them. Well that was my stance/experience too. Perhaps i m too influenced by usual protocol in other sports (including badminton, chess...) .

Competition can pair up people who might not otherwise play.

I think there may be some more positive points for the ladder?

[Walker]

I don't think that a 4/5 Boot/AET is "much longer" than a 5/7 Boot/AET. Also, in the Colosseum if a player is too busy to maintain a 4/5 boot/aet because of schedule or business, I have made concessions to have it lengthened (always after talking in private with the player!). Either way, that is not really a major difference that necessitates the existence of the ladder.

The only reason you were able to climb the ladder really fast is because a) there are only 6 people, and b) there are only 6 people. If the ladder was much larger, it would take longer for a new person to climb to the top (assuming you aren't already good enough to just win your initial challenges at the top). I agree that it would take less time than the Colosseum for a very good player to go from bottom to top, but the Colosseum caters to both the high-level and lower-level players. Top level players want good games too, and do not necessarily enjoy spanking newbies! So in the Colosseum, everyone can play with players in a similar skill bracket. If you're a good player in the Colosseum in say div. 3 or 4, sure you might not be playing against the best players but you're still getting good games against similar caliber players. And if you spank everyone in your division, then you have earned the right to better competition next season.

Actually, the maps are more different in the Colosseum than Neo Ladder. Neo Ladder maps are chosen from a set list, whereas Colosseum maps will vary as much as I want them to. So there is more potential variety for maps in the Colosseum, although everyone does play on the same map at one time.

I agree with you about the published results, and it being different from friendly games. As far as the leader board, the Ladder is not regarded as any sort of official measurement of a player's skill, simply because there are not enough players, and certainly not enough of the top players. And my point was just that you can still get good games against top players in friendly matches, because no one likes to lose, even if it doesn't count for anything!

The Ladder is a great idea, but the Colosseum is a better one (in my opinion) and there are not enough people for both to run properly. That is my two cents.

[ichbinsehselber]

Here I am expressing an interest to keep the Neo Ladder alive. Thanks to blanc1 for stating also such interest. And many thanks to the ladder admin for updating the thread.

Blanc1 has explained some differences between the Colosseum and the Neo Ladder. While these are all true I think there is another reason to keep it alive:
Some people just want to play more competitive games. In the Colosseum a player can play 2 games a month. This is not very much, unless you are busy.
A single game can be played and finished in a single weekend under optimal conditions.

Another argument for the ladder is that people can join at any time they want.

Inactive players do not hold up anything. If they do not respond just get to lower positions in the list.

What is the benefit of closing down the ladder? I can only imagine one benefit. The work of the ladder admins to update the ranking list and the maps and some other related work.

The ladder is automatically self-adapting. If there is less interest in the ladder, then there are fewer challenges, games and updates. So the work for the ladder admin automatically decreases. There may or may not be a revival. A problem only exists if all the ladder admins are busy and the normal players are active. So in case all the ladder admins lost interest, why not recruit a new ladder admin, who would like to join the group.

@walkerboh: It is good to see that you like the Colosseum a lot. You are organising it very well and you set it they way you consider it best. I like the colosseum a lot.
I also like other formats. There may be other people who prefer other formats. For instance Red11 might like the format of his own tournament even more. If you have little time to commit then you need to chose.

There are just too few tournaments! Closing down the neo ladder tournament does not help

[Azzaphox]

ichbin,

i think you just volunteered to organise a tourney.