Cheme's Leap Ladder - Updated 31/3/17

[Keefie]

The following text is by Chemefreak who implemented this version of the Leap Ladder. I will be responsible for updating this going forward and will endeavour to do this every few months.

Keefie

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Leap Ladder

For those of you that are too new to remember this, jpcloet’s dream (and the reason I was chosen as a CD) was the Leap Ladder. The format of the Leap Ladder was extremely cool, but also extremely complicated. I have wanted to resurrect the Leap Ladder and continue jpcloet’s dream in a workable format for several years now. Now with 10,000 medals issued and a Clan Tab, the time has come. Below is my format along with the differences with jpcloet’s format.

[spoiler=FORMAT]Starts – A clan must win a clan war to get on the Leap Ladder. If a clan’s first win is against a clan that is not on the Leap Ladder the winning clan appears at the bottom of the Leap Ladder. If a clan’s first win is against a clan that is on the Leap Ladder the clan appears above the clan they defeated. [This was possibly the biggest reason the Leap Ladder never took off. The formula for where a clan would first appear on the Leap Ladder was extremely difficult to understand. It is also the reason that the Leap Ladder is not very useful to rank clans for events...since you have to win a war to be on it (that being said, you have to play a certain number of wars to make some of the other ranking systems).]

Skips – This Leap Ladder is a “Pure Skip” format. This means that if the winning clan is lower on the Leap Ladder than the losing clan the winning clan moves directly above the losing clan. The losing clan only loses one spot. [The prior method was to allow this “Pure Skip” only if the clans were 7 or less spaces apart on the Leap Ladder. If the clans were further away than this, then the difference in rank between the clans was averaged and both clans moved up and down respectively to a middle point. The problem here was the uncertainty of movement depending on other wars and the sheer complexity of the formula in movement.]

Rationale – The original Leap Ladder minimized the movement of lower ranked clans and avoided “Pure Skip” because it was thought that lower ranked clans could possibly climb the Leap Ladder too fast with one win. However, even with the averaging after 7 spaces, it was thought that higher ranked clans would not want to risk falling even that far. Today, with the CCup, NCCup, and other similar events, higher ranked clans are playing lower ranked clans on a regular basis. As such, I do not believe these concerns are currently valid.

Removal - A clan will be removed when it has formally requested that it be disbanded and has finished its last war that will have an effect on the Leap Ladder.[/spoiler]
From War No. 501 to War No. 600 this Leap Ladder predicted the winning clan 76% of the time (so 3 out of 4 times the clan higher on the Leap Ladder defeated the clan lower on the Leap Ladder).

Below is the Leap Ladder at War No. 300, 350, 400, 450, 500, 550, and 600. Today, we have IcePack’s F400 and F41 that use numerical values. We also have IcePack’s Coaches’ Poll that uses subjective opinions. I believe there is a need for a Ladder type ranking system to more quickly reflect a clan's rise through the ranks. This is "unofficial" and the fact that I am a CD in no way indicates this ranking system will EVER be used officially. I will provide an updated Leap Ladder every 50 completed wars along with a dialogue regarding the skips, additions, and deletions from here on out. Enjoy.

[spoiler=Leap Ladder - February 29, 2016][/spoiler]
[spoiler=Leap Ladder - September 30, 2015][/spoiler]
[spoiler=Leap Ladder - April 30, 2015][/spoiler]
[spoiler=Leap Ladder - October 31, 2014][/spoiler]
[spoiler=Leap Ladder - April 30, 2014][/spoiler]
[spoiler=Leap Ladder - January 31, 2014][/spoiler]
[spoiler=Leap Ladder - December 16, 2013][/spoiler]
[spoiler=Leap Ladder - November 15, 2013][/spoiler]
[spoiler=Leap Ladder - October 14, 2013][/spoiler]
[spoiler=Leap Ladder 600 - August 26, 2013][/spoiler]
[spoiler=Leap Ladder 550 - May 2013][/spoiler]
[spoiler=Leap Ladder 500 - December 2012][/spoiler]
[spoiler=Leap Ladder 450 - Sept 2012][/spoiler]
[spoiler=Leap Ladder 400 - June 2012][/spoiler]
[spoiler=Leap Ladder 350 - Feb 2012][/spoiler]
[spoiler=Leap Ladder 300 - Sept 2011][/spoiler]

[Bruceswar]

interesting...

[kmhebert]

so what is this, exactly?

[greenoaks]

i like it

[chemefreak]

so what is this, exactly?

Pretty simple. If you beat a clan higher on the ladder you jump in front of them...no matter how high up. It is more of a fun exercise than anything else. It shows slightly different trends then other scoring systems and reacts faster.

For instance, IA has slowly dropped over the last 200 wars because they have NOT beaten a single clan ranked higher than them on the ladder. Now, the problem is that we know IA is a Top 10 clan. Another for instance, is ATL and FALL. A newer and slight newer (well compared to some) clans that can climb fast by beating clans that have beaten clans. There was a lot of fun movement on the ladder when TNC beat the Pack. Since TNC play so many wars, it moves around all the time.

[jigger1986]

Nice!

Another ranking system, always a fan of ranking systems.
If you need a hand with anything Ill be happy to help.

-jig

[xman5151]

Very interesting. I like it, good work

[grifftron]

I like it! Good job.

-griff

[IcePack]

Awesome work Cheme! I was playing around with a ladder system idea a few weeks ago, very interesting. Glad to see someone tackled it

[agentcom]

Why did you decide to have the winning clan (if lower ranked) move up, rather than have the losing clan (if higher ranked) move down? It would be interesting to see what the differences would be in those two systems. In yours, you can vault to the front, but you fall slowly. In the other, you could fall very quickly, but you'd have to slowly eek your way to the top.

[greenoaks]

it would also be interesting to see this applied to the Scoreboard.

[patrickaa317]

Why did you decide to have the winning clan (if lower ranked) move up, rather than have the losing clan (if higher ranked) move down? It would be interesting to see what the differences would be in those two systems. In yours, you can vault to the front, but you fall slowly. In the other, you could fall very quickly, but you'd have to slowly eek your way to the top.

That would be very interesting; though the top clans would lose motivation to play anyone lower ranked. In this method, they can only lose drop one place if they lose.

[Genoke]

I like the idea!

just one thought: Sometimes in clan tourney's the highest ranked clans gets a bye in the first (two) round(s). Meaning it avoids them to play the lowest ranked a bit.
Won't that affect this lean ranking too?

[chemefreak]

I like the idea!

just one thought: Sometimes in clan tourney's the highest ranked clans gets a bye in the first (two) round(s). Meaning it avoids them to play the lowest ranked a bit.
Won't that affect this lean ranking too?

I agree. The higher ranked clans aren't being forced to play the absolute lowest ranked typically.

[iAmCaffeine]

We'd be ranked #35 then. Only problem I see with this ranking, is that a higher ranked clan would rarely be interested in accepting a challenge from a lower ranked clan. Of course that's going to be the case with any ranking system, but it applies here even more so.

[Arama86n]

It's interesting, for me different perspectives always are.
If we're going to make any ranking official though, F400, not this.

[chemefreak]

We'd be ranked #35 then. Only problem I see with this ranking, is that a higher ranked clan would rarely be interested in accepting a challenge from a lower ranked clan. Of course that's going to be the case with any ranking system, but it applies here even more so.

I think this issue was fixed in this iteration by simply having a pure skip. So if the 30th ranked clan beats the 2nd ranked clan, the 30th ranked clan goes to 2nd and the 2nd ranked clan only falls to 3rd.

It's interesting, for me different perspectives always are.
If we're going to make any ranking official though, F400, not this.

It is not my intent to make this an official ranking system. This is more for fun. I agree that Ice's F400 is the more accurate ranking system. However, it does take quite a few wars to get on that system. This one should react a bit quicker. Should be fun the next time I update when there is a dialogue about who skipped who and when.

[iAmCaffeine]

We'd be ranked #35 then. Only problem I see with this ranking, is that a higher ranked clan would rarely be interested in accepting a challenge from a lower ranked clan. Of course that's going to be the case with any ranking system, but it applies here even more so.

I think this issue was fixed in this iteration by simply having a pure skip. So if the 30th ranked clan beats the 2nd ranked clan, the 30th ranked clan goes to 2nd and the 2nd ranked clan only falls to 3rd.

Potentially, yeah. Looking forward to seeing how it works out.

[JaneAusten]

I think it's neat. Thx Cheme!

[agentcom]

Why did you decide to have the winning clan (if lower ranked) move up, rather than have the losing clan (if higher ranked) move down? It would be interesting to see what the differences would be in those two systems. In yours, you can vault to the front, but you fall slowly. In the other, you could fall very quickly, but you'd have to slowly eek your way to the top.

That would be very interesting; though the top clans would lose motivation to play anyone lower ranked. In this method, they can only lose drop one place if they lose.

Maybe that would be the case if this ranking was going to be used for anything. But it's not. We have better ranking methods out there. As cheme pointed out, this is just for fun. So, I'm thinking that in the same spirit (just for fun), it would be interesting to see what the difference is in the opposite method.

Also, I've said this before, but I think it would be really cool to have a table with all the ranking systems in it. Probably sorted by the F400 because that seems to enjoy the most respect, but also the F41, the coach's poll, cheme's ladder, and ... the other one that I'm forgetting right now that scores clans as if they were CC players. Oh and add to that the most recent place in CCup and the other big tourneys.

So, you'd have each clan and at least half a dozen columns. I think that would be nifty

[chemefreak]

Also, I've said this before, but I think it would be really cool to have a table with all the ranking systems in it. Probably sorted by the F400 because that seems to enjoy the most respect, but also the F41, the coach's poll, cheme's ladder, and ... the other one that I'm forgetting right now that scores clans as if they were CC players. Oh and add to that the most recent place in CCup and the other big tourneys.

So, you'd have each clan and at least half a dozen columns. I think that would be nifty

Hopefully when we get our new CDs, this is something we can get going.

[Hamanu]

So with Coaches, Poll, F400, F41, Leap Frog... its like WBA, IBF, WBC?

[agentcom]

So with Coaches, Poll, F400, F41, Leap Frog... its like WBA, IBF, WBC?

Yeah or like the USA Today, AP, BCS, etc. polls/systems for college football. That's kind of my point. Lots of times you see those presented side-by-side. Glad to hear that cheme thinks this is one of the new CD responsibilities

[IcePack]

Cheme
Is there the possibility / potential to put approximate date to each of the spoilers listed (and ones in the future)?
Sometimes I imagine 50 war might take awhile while others might update rather quickly. Just to give a little better comparison as to when each update kicked in?
Just a thought still enjoying looking thru the history on this one
IcePack

EDIT: Thanks for adding the dates!

[lokisgal]

Immortal Assassins - (IA) are not listed?