Season 3 Top Player and All-Stars announced...

[jpcloet]

Also, what do you think of my suggestion for CL4 of a predefined formula?

At least people know what it is then. I like the idea of having min requirements being say min 4-4-4 in game types etc. to qualify. There were a number of top player candidates that did not play any doubles, although due to the lower number in S3, it was understandable.

[Rodion]

Also, what do you think of my suggestion for CL4 of a predefined formula?

At least people know what it is then. I like the idea of having min requirements being say min 4-4-4 in game types etc. to qualify. There were a number of top player candidates that did not play any doubles, although due to the lower number in S3, it was understandable.

Also, since doubles are usually considered to be more luck-based settings, top players are expected to help with their talents more on quads games and less on doubles.

I made a suggestion here ( viewtopic.php?f=441&t=125953&start=300&hilit=reserves - page 21) regarding eligibility minimums.

[quote=Rodion]Clans played:

90 total games (290 spots) - for MVP and reserve all-star team consideration, I think a minimum of 20 games would be appropriate (6.9% of that clan's spots).
20 doubles (40 spots) - for doubles all-star team consideration, I think a minimum of 3 doubles games would be appropriate (7.5% of that clan's spots).
30 triples (90 spots) - for triples all-star team consideration, I think a minimum of 6 triples games would be appropriate (6.67% of that clan's spots).
40 quadruples (160 spots) - for quadruples all-star team consideration, I think a minimum of 10 quadruples games would be appropriate (6.25% of that clan's spots).[/quote]

The suggestions was meant to get the ball starting, but it never did. Anyway, my proposition was of 3/6/10 minimums instead of 4/4/4.

[jpcloet]

On the doubles front there were a number of 3-0's. Again, brings us back to is 3-0 better than the one player at 8-1 or the 3 players at 6-1?

[Rodion]

On the doubles front there were a number of 3-0's. Again, brings us back to is 3-0 better than the one player at 8-1 or the 3 players at 6-1?

The suggestions was just to show how category minimums should be calibrated considering spot distribution between game types was uneven. The 3/6/10 numbers could be tweaked.