The Most recent Spearpoint mentioned an opening of discussion on a National Ranking System for Ancients players and it got me to thinking, something very rare these days, just as my wife. Anyway, I have a proposed system that just might work. It is designed to include players of all rules systems, as well as both tournament and non-tournament players. It favors those who play a large number of games, but it is my opinion that the frequency of playing usually makes one more skilled. The only drawback is that my system will require some bookkeeping of an unknown volume, however, with the use of E-mail and with the help of regional co-ordinators that can be overcome.

So what is this idea? Well, it is simply a point system based on the number of opponents. The winner of a match or a tournament gets the points and the other or others get a fraction of the points. The maximum number of points is the number of players and the others get a fraction of the points based on the position of finish by using the place position by placing a numerator of 1 over the position place which becomes the denominator, this fraction is the points that are received for the event. In a simple one on one game the winner gets 2 points and the looser gets 1/2 of that of 1 point. In a tournament of 10 players first place gets 10 points, second place 5 points, third place 3.33 points, fourth place 2.5 points, and so on. Decimals should be taken out no more than two places rounded up.

The only reasonable limit on this would be to limit one on one games to a total of 3 matches verse the same opponent to encourage players to seek out new opponents and to minimize padding of stats. I believe that this system would also help tournament organizers in keeping people from dropping out after one or two rounds since in a large tournament of twenty players finishing 10th still would get you 2 points, but a big win in the third or fourth round could move you up to say 5th place and 4 points. It would also encourage local clubs to host small 4 or 6 man tournaments that can be used to build up local interest in ancients gaming. Initially I would not limit the National Ranking system to just members of NASAMW but would let NASAMW simply act as the tallying and organizing mechanism. New members would be added out of a possible new found interest in ancients, interest in seeing the standings in SPEARPOINT, and a desire to participate in NASAMW sponsored tournaments ripe in potential points.

Tallies would have to be sent in to a central counting point either directly or through the regional co-ordinator who could keep track of his region. One on one games would have to be put on a post card signed by both players and sent in with of course the players names but also with the armies used and the rules used. The information gathered in this manner could also prove of interest to the members and leaders of NASAMW showing the popularity of certain armies, rules, and local preferences. Tournament results could be tallied by each tournament director and sent into the central collection point. At the end of the year the player in North America with the most points would be the National Point Champion and ranked #1. I think that the final tally should be taken after Historicon each year and start over from that point on. But a purely calendar format could also be used.

The above system could also be modified with the use of the computer by giving points based on the rankings of the players involved in the games and totaling the points of each opponent involved up to that point in the year, the winner gets the total of the other players points less their own rank and other players getting their fractions less their own rank. No player would ever be ranked lower than one point. Thus a one on one game between a novice and a high ranked player could move the novice up in the ranks quite quickly with a win. Late year tournaments would also be quite ripe with possible points. This of course could prove to be a nightmare in trying to keep things up to date, but it does pose some interesting possibilities. This would allow for a local player to go to a major tournament or seek out high ranking players around the country and come back to his local gaming environment and share some points.

Some examples: 7 player tournament Starting points Player A 21pts Player B 6 pts Player C 81 pts Player D 2 pts Player E 1 pt Player F 25 pts Player G 4 pts Total Points in tournament 140 Tournament finish and Points received 1) Player G: 136 or 140 - 4 2) Player C: 29.5 or (140 - 81) X 1/2 3) Player F: 38.3 or (140 - 25) X 1/3 4) Player E: 34.75 or (140 - 1) X 1/4 5) Player A: 23.8 or (140 - 21) X 1/5 6) Player B: 22.33 or (140 - 6) X 1/6 7) Player D: 19.71 or (140 - 2) X 1/7 Player G goes home now with 140 points ( his newly won 136 plus his original 4) and plays Player N who has 1 point. Either Player G wins and gets 1 point with Player N getting 70 points or half of his opponents total or Player N wins and gets 140 points and player G get .5 points.

It would be interesting to hear what other members have to think of this system.