UNOFFICIAL WCF Ladder Rankings

[Torture]

But if you have been ranking them this entire time based on who has defeated who, then you wouldn't have to think so hard on your flawed logic.

You just said you could do it right, but it's too hard to do that so we just move guys up and down based on who they beat, except for certain matches where guys pin or submit other guys, or the War match where guys also pin and submit guys even though that match was for the world title and thus the winner would automatically move to #1 but thats an exception as well.

You're worse than the BCS. You have yet to make one solid statement. LOL

[Seth]

Nah, Malachi was much worse than Kash, IMO

[Torture]

I don't even know who those guys were.. but I do remember Kash being a lot like Jay Price. Just, personality wise.

[Deleted]

They were one in the same, IMO.
Kash and Malachi that is.


And Torture, for that comment, fuck you.

[Seth]

Nov 10, 2010 19:46:34 GMT -5 Torture said:

But if you have been ranking them this entire time based on who has defeated who, then you wouldn't have to think so hard on your flawed logic.

You just said you could do it right, but it's too hard to do that so we just move guys up and down based on who they beat, except for certain matches where guys pin or submit other guys, or the War match where guys also pin and submit guys even though that match was for the world title and thus the winner would automatically move to #1 but thats an exception as well.

You're worse than the BCS. You have yet to make one solid statement. LOL

The thing that annoys me the most here is that you really can't see past your own flawed "logic." Yeah, your system "works" because its basically "rank people based on who the person doing the ranking thinks they belong." Great. That isnt what the ladder was ever going for. The only exceptions to how people move in rankings are this:

1. War (Because how the hell do you change a ranking system based on something like that)
2. Elimination tags (Though this would be up to Price, it seems silly to change based on them since everyone would be moving all over the place)
3. World Champ is always #1.

So besides those exceptions, the rules are "If you make someone pin or submit, you move above them in the rankings."

Done. Solid statements.

[Torture]

Yeah that's solid, but why are those exceptions? The winning team beat Averys team? Avery has beat Day, lost, and beat Bo Young.

Day has lost, won at PPV, and lost a tag match.

Avery is third best in WCF?

-

I still find it hilarious that you added exceptions to reasons I posted. My logic isn't flawed, that's why you're constantly making up exceptions, and defenses for something that obviously doesn't make sense. Day beat Avery at the PPV and is the United States Champion.. why is he still listed underneath Avery?

And WAR you have to count since the new World Champion would be at the top of the list, right?

[Deleted]

For now, yes.

Soon as someone ranked 4th or lower pins him or makes him submit, he's moved down and they take his spot.

[whysoserious]

Torture is right.

And he totally didn't blow me to say it.

[Deleted]

And just because he is at #3 does not mean that he's the 3rd best overall. It just means that as of this week, he is.

If we were to go back the last year and look at all the records and what not, would he be the 3rd best? Not by a long shot.

[Donald Deruty]

Yeah i do agree with Torture! But i dont want to get washed into this so...i will just sit back and listen. But i think in my own oppinion is...Torture is correct! Nothing against anyone i just think he is right.

[Torture]

Yeah, exactly my point, Price.

Avery was never that high, and he won a ton of matches, but then comes back, beats Day and BAM he's ranked in the top five?

Explain that one.. or is there more exceptions?

[Deleted]

You want this job?

[Seth]

Nov 10, 2010 19:53:40 GMT -5 Torture said:

Yeah that's solid, but why are those exceptions? The winning team beat Averys team? Avery has beat Day, lost, and beat Bo Young.

Day has lost, won at PPV, and lost a tag match.

Avery is third best in WCF?

-

I still find it hilarious that you added exceptions to reasons I posted. My logic isn't flawed, that's why you're constantly making up exceptions, and defenses for something that obviously doesn't make sense. Day beat Avery at the PPV and is the United States Champion.. why is he still listed underneath Avery?

And WAR you have to count since the new World Champion would be at the top of the list, right?

THE RANKINGS DONT MEAN "This number best in WCF." necessarily! Thats never been what they meant! ITS A RANKING BASED ON MOST RECENT WINS AND LOSSES. If you want to make your own ranking thread, go for it!

YOU DONT HAVE LOGIC. Your logic is "ranked them based on who someone subjectively thinks is better than whoever else," that isn't logic, thats just guesswork.

If Day would beat Avery in a match that WASNT an exception, then it'd be fine. But he didnt. And its not like elimination tags or War happen that often.

To be honest, I'm not sure how Mikami did over the top battle royals, or three way dances, or things like that, to be honest. So there could be other exceptions I suppose, but again, at least when we come to it it would be set rules, not "You beat someone so now I'm going to randomly move you to where I feel like you should be"

NO ranking system is perfect. Period. This one is what it is and if you don't like it, ignore it or make your own.

[Seth]

Nov 10, 2010 19:57:53 GMT -5 Torture said:

Yeah, exactly my point, Price.

Avery was never that high, and he won a ton of matches, but then comes back, beats Day and BAM he's ranked in the top five?

Explain that one.. or is there more exceptions?

YOU IDIOT.

HES RANKED THAT HIGH BECAUSE HE BEAT SOMEONE ELSE HIGH IN THE RANKINGS.

ITS THAT GODDAMN EASY.

[Seth]

And okay Torture then where would you put yourself and BK? You're both former World Champs but you don't have any recent big wins or anything. Do you put yourself near the top because youve both beaten everyone in the past and yada yada, even though you havent lately? WHERES THE LOGIC IN THAT? Or do you leave yourself at the bottom... even though now you're below guys thatve never held any Titles, let alone the World Title? WHERES THE LOGICCC

[Torture]

But that doesn't make sense, that's what I'm saying. Your defense is exceptions, and saying mine is subjectivity, when clearly it's not.

Mine is based on guys you have defeated. If you would have just done that from the start there wouldn't be this problem. Do you understand now? Almost everyone on the roster has fought almost everyone, and if not, you can clearly put guys in position based on their winning percentage, or who they have defeated and lost to in the right position.

You are saying that Chris Avery is the third best wrestler THIS week in WCF? You tell me he's "RANKED THAT HIGH" then tell me it's not based on how their ranked.. What are you saying?

If you're just putting up a list of guys who pin guys this week but get pinned next week you're wasting your time, and that's made obvious with your "exceptions".

[Torture]

The logic would be to have us based on winning percentages and since Torture has defeated most of the guys on the rankings (as has BK) then we would be placed accordingly. And my last five fights were all tag title matches, then our tag titles LOSS then Torture dies, then comes back to fight Creeping Death.

You're trying to tell me that Brad Kane and Torture have honestly not been apart of this roster including 80% of the guys in the rankings?

[Deleted]

You can't rank people based on their current winning percentages. If you did that, Logan wouldn't be #1. It'd go:

Malenko
Torture
Price

That makes 0 sense (no offense to Troy)

[Torture]

No, we both agreed that our World Champion would be #1...

And since you obviously don't go based on winning percentages you should take them off the list.

And the percentages would be only when trying to organize a group of guys that aren't offically ranked via titles, or pinfalls.

[Deleted]

Nov 10, 2010 19:59:11 GMT -5 Jayson Price said:

You want this job?