Brief context for anyone out of the loop: at the end of every year, the list of the world’s top 100 Melee player comes out. It is decided upon by a group of over 50 panelists, and the list is released over the course of three week. Here are spots 70-61, released on the day of this post: https://www.redbull.com/us/en/esports/stories/1331835584967/ssbmrank-2016-70-61-red-bull-esports. I was ranked #62.
I had a feeling my placing on SSBMRank would be released today, and drafted this post last night in my head… let’s see if I remember whatever I came up with. My thoughts were not dependent on where I ended up on the list, but now that my ranking has officially been released, I can comment on my placing as well.
Any player who is on the come-up that doesn’t make the top 100 list will feel snubbed. I read somewhere on Twitter that “more than 100 people feel like they deserve to be on the Top 100 list, so of course people will feel snubbed.” I think that’s pretty true. I definitely felt like that last year.
I don’t like nitpicking over minute details when it comes to rankings, but that is the reality we face. In an ideal world, we compute these lists using computers and algorithms, but the data simply isn’t there. That’s why we use a panel. When I first got my hands on all the data provided to panelists, I immediately formatted it to see what insights I could gain through data manipulation. I tried giving each player a score based on their placing at every event, weighting events with more entrants more heavily. I did this by dividing the number of entrants by the player’s placing, then adding up those numbers and averaging that score. Unfortunately, that algorithm doesn’t properly account for player skill depth at an event, and some players landed criminally low or uncharacteristically high. The more I finagled with the data, the closer I came to ultimately accepting that there simply isn’t enough data to “accurately” rank 100 players.
This goes back to my previous point – if you feel snubbed and really want to be ranked, make it impossible to argue against your placing. After the 2015 list didn’t include me, I felt motivated to build up a resume that was rock-solid. If I enter enough major events, take down enough names, and placing consistently well, who is going to keep me off the list? Besides the MIOM illuminati, of course.
In any case, here we are. I’ve been ranked the #62 Melee player in the world. My conservative guess for my own placing was ~65. I think it’s important for players to recognize that they aren’t being ranked at their peaks; a focus on one’s own peak rather than a holistic view of one’s performance over the year is often what leads to people feeling snubbed. I feel good about my year, overall. I think I’m the only newcomer on the list to get top 32 at two majors this year. I consistently outplaced my seeding at regionals and nationals, with the exception of SSC. After placing top 32 at both EVO and Pound, where I definitely exceeded expectations, I was extremely hard on myself for a 49th placing at SSC16. Going back to my philosophy of “making it impossible to argue against your placing,” I felt my sub-par performance at SSC opened a hole in my resume.
Then I was offered a ballot for SSBMRank 2016, and I saw everyone else’s placings. That’s when I realized that there are very, very few consistent players. Almost everyone has at least one stain on their record this year. The players that don’t have inconsistencies are easy to rank – lloD is a good example of that. He consistently overcame his seeding, and pretty much only lost to top 30 players. That, in my opinion, gives him a strong case for top 50. Another example is dizzkidboogie – he consistently beat highly-ranked players, and rarely lost to anyone seeded lower than him, which is why you’ll see him in the top 20 or 25 this year.
I would definitely be ranked higher had Eden counted toward this ranking period, with my win over Prof and additional win over DJ. Syrox would be higher as well. But I was oddly relieved to hear that Eden wouldn’t count toward the 2016 SSBMRank, despite the fact I’d been planning to place well there to boost my exposure and rank. It was like a weight lifted off my shoulders – I’d done all I could for 2016, and all I had to do at Eden was play my best, rather than “play my best… so that I can be ranked higher.” It was also a nice reminder that whether I am ranked 100 or 10, I can still place well at tournaments. The rank is just a reflection of the past year, and not necessarily an indicator of my future improvement. I hope other people have this realization as well – I found it quite liberating. You will definitely see me continue to work hard and play my best. This remains unaffected by SSBMRank.
It’s strange. There is no good way to statistically calculate the top 100 players in the world, given the enormous gaps in data. The panelists were presented a prompt: “Given the quality and quantity of work in 2016, if everyone entered 100 tournaments, who on average would place the best?” The criteria used from panelist to panelist varied based on how much they weighted consistency, peaks versus lows, wins and losses, and so forth. This is fine. But I wanted to point something out: legacy has no place in this process.
I saw some arguments for considering “legacy” – a player’s ranking and placings prior to 2016 – in the 2016 SSBMRank. I think considering legacy strays from the prompt, and doesn’t accurately represent current skill levels. If Mang0 placed 17th at every major in 2016, I don’t think it would make sense to rank him 10th on SSBMRank. Given the quality and quantity of his work in this hypothetical 2016, if everyone entered 100 tournaments, our best guess is that he would, on average, place 17th. Therefore, he would be ranked around 17th on SSBMRank 2016. If Bizzarro Flame placed 5th at every major in 2016, would it not be appropriate to place him around 5th on SSBMRank? His 98th ranking on the 2015 list should not, in my opinion, weigh on his 2016 placing. Only, as the prompt states, the quality and quantity of his work in 2016.
If I misunderstood how people would quantitatively account for “legacy” when ranking players, I would be happy to be corrected, so please let me know! All in all, it’s miraculous how the list ultimately comes together given all the variations in criteria. And on some level, it’s impossible to eliminate bias for yourself and for your friends. But that’s why we get representatives from all over the world, who come from all aspects of the Melee community. Shoutouts to everyone who worked on the list, and who put in the work to ensure the list was as accurate as possible.
To all you players who are on the list, and to you who hope to be on the list: keep entering events. Compete and compete and compete. That’s how you get better, that’s how you get ranked, and that’s how the game grows. A lot of players got flown out to Eden, and a lot of players came out locally. I was neither, and a lot of people asked me, “why are you here?” This confused me. Obviously I was there to compete! I was there to win, and to grow as a player. If you have a passion for competing, and you see an opportunity to take names, you seize that opportunity. I saw Eden as one of those opportunities, and I jumped on it.
Well I did my best to hammer out what thoughts I could while in the airport, but we’ve got to board our flight soon so that’s all I’m going to say for now. Onwards and upwards!