Cake Poker
Home
Forum
News
Articles
Site Reviews
Book Reviews
Interviews
Chat
Tournaments
60% Rakeback
50% RakebackNew!
125% Rakeback
Probabilities
Glossary
Poker Gear
Links
Advertise
User Name  
 
Password
Cookie?  
 
 
Poker Players on Launchpoker.com
LaunchPoker.com provides you with all the information you need about this year's WSOP event, from the 2008 WSOP schedule to the latest 2008 WSOP updates.
Online poker reviews of rooms such as Full Tilt Poker, Poker Stars and Titan Poker.
Click here to play!
Extras

Cool Hand Poker. Get $350 Free!!
PokerListings

Go Back PokerForums.org > General > Professionals & Tournaments > my proposal for ladder

Notices

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 08-09-2005, 08:10 PM
Steve-O's Avatar
I donk off Wota's $$$
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,362
Trade Rating: (0)
Default my proposal for ladder

there seem to be a few flaws in our current system

the first problem i see is; the length of time people have to accept a challenge.

my proposal; if after 24 hours there has been no response you can pull the challenge and challenge either another player or accept a challenge from another player.

If you let the pending challenge continue than after 36 hours if there is no response the challenged player forfeits.

Once the challenge is accepted you have 36 hours to set up the match.

__________________________________________________ _________________


The second problem I see is the point system and advancing.

My proposal; I suggested this before and I still think it is the best method for this, a flat point system based on the players rank.

beating the #1 player is worth 20 points beating #2 19 and so on down to 1 point for #20 and beyond.

This will encourage people to play the highest ranked player possible just like the current system. It also allows for people to challenge downward instead of only up increasing the # of possible poeple they can play.

#4 could challenge anyone from #7 to #1 (3 spots either way)

__________________________________________________ _______________
__________________
For poker news, strategy, and more, check out my daily column at Examiner.com
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 08-10-2005, 03:45 AM
missy's Avatar
Poker Hustler
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: l.a. county
Posts: 901
Trade Rating: (0)
Send a message via AIM to missy
Default

i really do like the first suggestion, since i'm stuck waiting for the three people above me to play matches at the moment. change the 36 to a 48 though. give people a bit more time.

the second is fine too; i don't care about it as much. the guy in first would be getting an overwhelming amount of action though.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 08-10-2005, 06:38 AM
Marm's Avatar
PokerForums God
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Cleveland
Posts: 9,296
Trade Rating: (0)
Send a message via AIM to Marm Send a message via MSN to Marm
Default

It can't be less than 72 hours, not fair to people who dont check PFO every ten minutes. People shouldn't be punished for having normal lives.

I'll sit on the point system and see what we can work up, Before we kicked this off, I had asked for other suggestions on systems, and nobody spoke up.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 08-10-2005, 06:54 AM
Steve-O's Avatar
I donk off Wota's $$$
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,362
Trade Rating: (0)
Default

the guy in first would have the same action only he/she could challenge #2-4. And I did Suggest this before we started the ladder.

If you are involved in the ladder you should be checking on it within 3 days, if you do not check PFO more than once or twice a week you shouldn't be participating in the ladder.

Again these are just suggestions, right now #1 and #2 will always be playing each other especially with the grudge match policy, unless #3 and #4 can sneak in a challenge. therefor #1 and #2 right now could possibly never change, just play 1 match against each other once a week

In my previous suggestion before the ladder started I said that a player would be able to use only his top 2 point totals for a week, so if he played 10 matches that week he could only use 2. but this is much more experamental.
__________________
For poker news, strategy, and more, check out my daily column at Examiner.com
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 08-10-2005, 09:53 AM
bonchkid's Avatar
change my title babo
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 6,758
Trade Rating: (0)
Default

Not being able to check PFO every 10 minutes is a punishment in itself.
__________________
“There's no sense in being precise when you don't even know what you're talking about.” - John von Neumann
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:13 AM.

   Designed by
      
No Deposit Bonus
Poker Strategy
Poker Rooms
PartyPoker Bonus Codes
Poker Site USA
Online Casino Bonuses
Pokerspiele
Casinos That Accept USA Players
Poker Rakeback
Full Tilt bonus code
Rakeback
Casino
Nowadays in the Internet the Players are looking for a good Casino Bonus to find the best possible options for online Roulette.There is now the option of RtlPoker and a nice Casino Bonus to play some other games then just Poker.
The ideal casino site for gokkasten and even online poker including online casino games that can be found on mijn online casino, your casino information site for when gambling online or even offline.
Party Poker bonus code & room review
Tony G talks about his experinces in his blog
REVIEW OF PARADISE POKER WEBSITE
Online Poker Room Directory and latest poker news
Best Online Poker info on Internet!
Ultimate Bet new 40% deposit bonus
Copyright © 2004-2008 PokerForums.org, a Merendi Networks Inc. project.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0 ©2008, Crawlability, Inc.