The Top LOSERS in CC

[freeroll84]

ill be up on that list shortly

[DiM]

this list is supposed to give credit to those that play mostly 6-8p singles but what happens if a guy plays 8p games and has a 50% win? that would be f*cking brilliant and yet he would not be on that list, despite being better than all those that are on the list right now

[Scott-Land]

this list is supposed to give credit to those that play mostly 6-8p singles but what happens if a guy plays 8p games and has a 50% win? that would be f*cking brilliant and yet he would not be on that list, despite being better than all those that are on the list right now

You must be speaking of the one and only Poo-Maker.......

[Ray Rider]

You forget that those are actually excellent (Or at least pretty good) win rates if you play quadruples, four-player singles, five-player singles, six-player singles, seven-player singles, and eight-player singles.

Exactly.

[Mr_Adams]

if your winning 32% of 5 6 7 or 8 player games, your kicking ass.

[frogger4]

hey, I want to congratulate all those "losers" on page one. I am on page 71. Obviously they are not losers to get that far, regardless of their win percent. Really, that number is meaningless. You should all be calling me a loser

[wcaclimbing]

I used to be on page 1, had a 29% win rate.
And I've got a screenshot to prove it.
Would that count to get on the list? score was at 2944 in the screenshot.

[waynemgough]

1. Hardly misguided - I said it was a generalization. And I can show you numerous results of high rankers where it's accurate.
2. I looked at Clive's games and about 50% of them are 1v1's vs Cooks or new recruits. You simply proved my point. Even if it's only 40%, the point still remains. They are all cooks/new recruits/low ranks.

Generalisations are dangerous and annoy me immensely, as everyone gets tarnished with the same brush.

I guess I am well known for being fairly good at sequential Waterloo foggy 1v1s, but it is assumed that I am beating up new recruits most of the time to get my 87% win rate.

I have always know this to be unfair, so I thought I'd actually count them up... (the following assumes that since the games have finished as many players have gone up as have gone down - not sure how good that assumption is but I have to go with it)

I have finished 446 sequential foggy 1v1 Waterloo games; only 66 (15%) have been against players with scores of below 1100 (and with a single exception, all have joined public games second, so I haven't targeted them specifically); on the other hand 116 (26%) have been against players who currently have a score of 2000 or more (a fair few of these are tournament games or ones where I've joined second - I hunt the high ranks not the low ones - I want a challenge not just free points!), the remaining 264 games are against players who currently have scores between 1100 and 2000, many of whom have 70%+ win rates on Waterloo themselves.

Because I don't want to hide it, and someone will find them anyway, I do have a "darker" side too (although I've grown out of it now): I tried my hand at freestyle 1v1 joining second al la MOBA, JR, torcav... and my results show how hard it is to gain points from these games - I won 189 from 207(91%) and yet only have a net score of +88 from those games, one extra loss to a cook and it would be zero.

So I have got my rank from the Waterloo games mainly... and not from new recruits per se.

Rereading your points above, I've just realised that they are very ambiguous and I may just be agreeing with you... whatever...

how many of these players between 1100/2000 were experienced waterloo map players at the time of you beating them?

i may be a brigadier, but playing waterloo map. i'd be the equivalent of a cook.

[Blitzaholic]

this list is supposed to give credit to those that play mostly 6-8p singles but what happens if a guy plays 8p games and has a 50% win? that would be f*cking brilliant and yet he would not be on that list, despite being better than all those that are on the list right now

very good point, perhaps she could do a minimum requirement of games like 100 would perhaps resolve this issue and in the 1st 5 and top 5 list, mine is 40% and under to give credit to those awesome singles players that win over 30%, cause there is a half dozen or dozen or so that do win between 31 and 40% and play tons of singles.

[Scott-Land]

this list is supposed to give credit to those that play mostly 6-8p singles but what happens if a guy plays 8p games and has a 50% win? that would be f*cking brilliant and yet he would not be on that list, despite being better than all those that are on the list right now

very good point, perhaps she could do a minimum requirement of games like 100 would perhaps resolve this issue and in the 1st 5 and top 5 list, mine is 40% and under to give credit to those awesome singles players that win over 30%, cause there is a half dozen or dozen or so that do win between 21 and 40% and play tons of singles.

Even earlier in this thread and some others, a lot of players complained that rank wasn't a good indicator of how good a player is. Now it's gauged on win %. Which is it DIM, if you have a high percentage you're better? I don't think so. Where does this thread state nor does the TOP5 Under 40 state anything about how good someone is based on their win percentage. It's just a criteria that Robin set at 33 and Blitz set at 40, to distinguish Single's players from Team players- a fair one if you ask me.

Poo-Maker is probably the best all around single's player (seq and free) and he's not on the list. TBH- a single's player shouldn't want to be on that list because if he does have 50%+, he doesn't need a list to be known.

[Blitzaholic]

i did mean 31% to 40% not 21% oops

[KoE_Sirius]

Looks at my rank and at yours...I do believe that says it all mate. Play with better competition

Risk Snob

[Bruceswar]

I am one of the top losers....


80 Bruceswar 2801 1658 454 (27%) Colonel Colonel 4.8 United States United States

Updated after another singles win

[Thomas.Paine]

Jeeze, those guys really need to start playing stacked triples games.

yeah, seriously, or 1v1 games with recruits.

[Destroyer Sol]

I will win, I won over 60% of my games up to no.300. Look at me now ha ha ha

[Craig Xiao]

Yes thats right, non-premium members have just as much right to play games as idiots who pay. lack 1 : to be deficient or missing

[Georgerx7di]

Come on robin, you know everyone on that list plays most 6 player games. Glad I didn't make the list though, lol.

Furthermore you have won 24% of your 6 player classic std, seq, esc games. I point this out because this is the board game setting. 24% with 6 good players is very nice.

[Scott-Land]

You've been away too long- George

[kwanton]

Sooo close to being on that list.....

[Bruceswar]

Sooo close to being on that list.....

To make the first page you need 2416 at least, as of my last check. With you are 2000+ you still need about 400 points to make it. I am surely a top loser... I have lost sooo many games... LOL

[Robinette]

Hadn't looked at this in quite some time...

And there are some new top losers to point out...

11 Hesoos 3770 1084 327 (30%) - don't know you
23 ballenus 3506 792 234 (30%) - don't know you
25 maniacmath17 3477 1335 433 (32%) - statistically speaking, a really nice guy
35 joecoolfrog 3283 431 118 (27%) - a paranoid limey jerk
37 Beadle 3267 264 88 (33%) - don't know you
66 JBoy 3048 848 213 (25%) Brigadier Brigadier - the jury is still deliberating
83 nesterdude 2921 3632 1164 (32%) - has a bigger gun than most
92 steve066 2868 1304 322 (25%) - great player, and a smooth flirt
103 austex 2807 790 245 (31%) - nice guy, the quiet handsome type
108 milwood 2779 199 63 (32%) - don't know you
121 jordanlover 2744 1742 568 (33%) - don't know you
125 Soldier4Christ 2735 1345 414 (31%) - don't know you
152 Silvex 2687 569 169 (30%) - don't know you
166 DAZMCFC 2644 1959 621 (32%) - don't know you
173 cisco2001 2628 2197 638 (29%) - don't know you
179 Stbtgal 2618 272 83 (31%) - don't know you
181 Coach Courbis 2616 156 47 (30%) - don't know you
191 Iccinot Nabrus 2585 676 166 (25%) - don't know you
199 Serpentor 2578 500 128 (26%) - don't know you
205 RL_Orange 2569 3828 1051 (27%) - great player, and a great lover
211 4red 2558 2334 719 (31%) - don't know you
219 khushhal 2547 198 66 (33%) - don't know you
224 mcnorm 2544 125 36 (29%) - don't know you
227 Anomander 2540 150 41 (27%) - don't know you
240 BeepBeepImaJeep 2518 295 83 (28%) - don't know you
243 brandoncfi 2515 2848 904 (32%) - don't know you
245 hiddeous man 2508 805 258 (32%) - don't know you

I'm no longer a top loser myself

[ManBungalow]

I'm no longer a top loser myself

How did that happen ?

[JBoy]

66 JBoy 3048 848 213 (25%) Brigadier Brigadier - the jury is still deliberating

hey, my win% is 25.11792, get it straight !! and when does the jury come back ??

[Robinette]

66 JBoy 3048 848 213 (25%) Brigadier Brigadier - the jury is still deliberating

hey, my win% is 25.11792, get it straight !! and when does the jury come back ??

we haven't played enough for me to know yet what you are made of...
you're obviously a prodigious loser, which i find very attractive...
but your personality is still a mystery to me...

Shall we play another game?

[Bruceswar]

woohoo for top losers! I am on the list for sure. LOL