Either way, I don't think we have any way to say that it should be a Fly-Eagles-Fly - Waredude game. When the game between tomato - tugwash is finished, the ratings will look different.
True. I was just using as an example, since we are currently the two highest rated except for you, Junebug (who just lost a challenge game, I think), and CaptainTugWash.
@Fly-Eagles-Fly ok. I just wanted to make sure you wasn't looking forward to something that might not happen. If the ratings would look like they are now and we decide to choose both by rating and we choose not to include Junebug444 because he played recently, then yes. That would be correct.
I think first we need to decide if it is 2 or 4 players in the candidates and then we decide the rules for qualifying. I want at least 1 player by rating, but otherwise I am quite open minded.
I think we should do four. That way more people(but not too many) have a chance at the title.
I vote for four too.
Let's wait a bit and see if everyone thinks a 4 player candidates tournament is a good idea. No rush for a decision.
I actually like just having a candidate game and challenge game, but I won't push it if most other people like the four player.
4 player sounds good, I would suggest the top two highest rated (seeded), along with two who are picked by a committee (unseeded), which allows for the rotation of those who want a shot but can't get their rating up.
I'd also suggest that the same player can't play in two consecutive challenges, to further assist with making sure everyone who wants to be involved can do so.
We could also do something, like
1 Highest rated
1 Highest rated among those that have never played a candidate or challenge game
Or as an alternate to that second one:
1 Highest rated among those that have not played a candidate or challenge game within the last 4 championship cycles.
2 unseeded "wild cards" are fine with me.
One easy way to prevent the same player from challenging twice in a row is to start the candidates in parallell with the championship game.
We could put there names in a randomizer. I think that they should have to except the nomination though. Just in case they do not want to challenge the champ.
We should have a club for the committee to discuss this stuff in so that we are not taking up extra space in this club. Then we could sort different jobs onto different forums
Any player can always decline and we will just pick the next in line. The exception I guess is that the champion must accept the challenge or else he looses the title.
Let's not get distracted about what the title stands for here.
I think rating is a lot better than winrate. Winrate ignores the strength of your opponents and your old losses will always follow you. Rating will depend on the strength of your opponents and the most recent results matters more than old results.