Help
It is really does make any sense to rank in top 100 list folks that are geting “best” results replaying the round.
Perhaps a separate list can be maintained for those who are getting best time irrespectively from a number of rounds.
Page 1 of 1
Second &+ rounders should not be ranked in top 100 Free weekly Friday tournaments ranking
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 4,003
- Joined: 2014-March-15
- Gender:Male
Posted 2024-October-06, 02:30
It would be extremely easy for someone to look at the hands before their "first" attempt (e.g. another account, or just by watching one of the many expert YouTubers who record it), so having a leaderboard for first attempts would be just as meaningless.
If you want to see how well you've done, use the first leaderboard (which is against people who played the original tournament, so it really was a legitimate first attempt).
The top 100 list is for a challenge really unrelated to bridge, trying to manipulate robots into getting 100% scores, presumably sparked by Hanoi5's "The quest for 100%" video series.
If you want to see how well you've done, use the first leaderboard (which is against people who played the original tournament, so it really was a legitimate first attempt).
The top 100 list is for a challenge really unrelated to bridge, trying to manipulate robots into getting 100% scores, presumably sparked by Hanoi5's "The quest for 100%" video series.
Page 1 of 1