What's Wrong With the World League?

I think the world league is an excellent idea, but I think dividing teams into four is unfair, and removes the competitiveness.

Firstly, it is unfair to small teams, who may have only a couple players in each rating bracket.

And when I say that it removes the competitiveness, I mean that now we'll never be able to see who's better in a given match. We'll only see who has the better players in a given rating.

Instead everyone should be thrown into the same group, but countries should be divided up into Groups A-E (Like the Olympics) based initially on size, overall rating average and rating of top players, and countries should only play other countries in the same group, but with the opportunity to advance. Say teams ranked 1-20 will be group A, and only play each other, and with rankings by wins and losses, countries could quickly move upwards (or downwards.) So unlike in the current system not only will there be real and serious competition for the top place in Group A, every team, conceivably become #1, instead of just becoming #1 in a rating bracket.

This system also rewards depth, i.e. having and using a large number of players, instead of rewarding teams with only a few really strong players.

And as long as teams are allowed to choose how many players compete in each match, people won't be edged out of the opportunity to play, and there will be a fairer and more in depth comparison of each country.

And it will be easier to track, as you'll only be keeping track of one group, and ranking one group of teams, instead of four or five groups.

I think more players will join smaller teams over time (the World League tournaments are a month away) and the problems you are talking about will go away. Although you do bring up a good point... maybe the staff will work something out.