EA Forums - Banner

GWC leader board issue

I noticed in the standings of the gaming world championship that a loss (L) seems to rank you higher in the standings than an overtime loss does (OTL). So you’re telling me that if I got blown out by some team in stead of battling them to overtime that I would have been better off? This doesn’t make sense. My team is 14 - 9 - 2 and i have teams 14 - 10 - 1 ahead of me in the standings. It would seem right that an overtime loss should rank you higher. Please clarify why it is this way. Thanks

Replies

  • I've flagged this before in HUT Champs - someone with a record of 19-0-1 finished below 4 other players with records of 19-1-0. I understand that in a complete tie situation then the points score can be used as a tie-breaker but you're absolutely correct in my opinion that on OT loss (worth 1 point in the NHL) should be ranked higher than tie breaking points but that's not what they do.
  • It’s not right, it’s a mistake, but maybe they’re not willing to change it since they’ve been doing it that way all year? Well maybe they can/will fix it once they “verify results” for this tournament. I guess we’ll see in a day or so.. it would be nice if an administrator or someone could make a comment on this
  • I don't think it's a mistake - as in an error that EA wasn't aware of that they can now fix because it's been brought to their attention. I think it's someone said "We're going to rank these competitions by wins, after that it's the points method" and didn't pay any attention to losses or OT losses....
  • Kuus2
    213 posts Member
    In GWC, as per the rules, ranking of teams is based on wins, round points, and goal differential.
  • It might be in the rules but it’s still wrong. Battling into overtime should still be worth something and right now it isn’t worth anything. The real NHL used to have overtime not worth anything as well, but they changed it to count as 1 point for OTL, 2 for OTW. Yes in playoff hockey it isn’t worth anything but isn’t this portion of the GWC more similar to a regular season than playoffs? I think so. And considering that not every team plays the same level of competitor, points should come in to play AFTER overtime losses are considered. So it should be 2 points for a W, 1 point for an OTL, then number of Losses (less losses is better), then round points as a tie breaker.
  • NHL_Live_Support
    182 posts EA NHL Developer
    Kuus2 wrote: »
    In GWC, as per the rules, ranking of teams is based on wins, round points, and goal differential.

    Leth_Darksun is correct. If you are tied in Wins, then the next tiebreaker is Round Points.
  • Kuus2 wrote: »
    In GWC, as per the rules, ranking of teams is based on wins, round points, and goal differential.

    Leth_Darksun is correct. If you are tied in Wins, then the next tiebreaker is Round Points.

    Yes we know that - but the point about the post is that is the not the correct / fair way to rank people based on wins / losses. As the OP clearly explains an OT loss should be valued more than a regulation loss since a win is valued more than the opposition ranking why should this be more important than taking your opponent to OT?

    In your win based system you ignore the opponent rank - if you win you win. So why is any loss demoted and all of sudden after wins the opponent rank is the most important stat? Lack of consistency is the problem - either rank by points, or by wins:
    • If points, and two players have the same number of points then tiebreak by head-to-head or win / loss ratio after points
    • If wins, then rank by wins, then OT losses and then if two players have the same number of wins and OT losses you could tiebreak by the round points.
  • So it should be 2 points for a W, 1 point for an OTL, then number of Losses (less losses is better), then round points as a tie breaker.

    The only problem with number of losses in this system is the person who plays less games will always go above the one who plays more: The number of wins and OT losses are the same therefore more regulation losses = more games played.

    A win/loss ratio would be much fairer in a system where the opponent is not used to rank a players performance, as the win based system does initially.
  • The point is actually this:

    I think if you are going to base rankings on wins as it is stated, then you should primarily base it on a wins based point system which right now it is not.

    wins based system as per the NHL:
    regulation win 2 points
    overtime loss 1 point

    should teams be tied in win points the first tie breaker should be:

    winning percentage : Wins divided by games played (or number of losses)

    should that be tied the second tie breaker should be: round points.

    And the reason for this is because all teams do not play the same opponents so round points should come last as a decider, not before total Win points (wins plus overtime losses), and definitely not before winning percentage. Some people might overall play easier or harder opponents so round points won’t texhnically be the greatest judgement when comparing teams.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!